13/03/2018

0:00:00 > 0:00:02something which is hugely beneficial to them and save them a lot of time

0:00:02 > 0:00:10and a lot of angst in their dealings with HMRC.

0:00:10 > 0:00:20Sends 2010 the minimum wage has gone from £5 93 to £7 83 per hour, an

0:00:20 > 0:00:24increase of 32%. At the same time, the take-home pay of someone working

0:00:24 > 0:00:30on the minimum wage has gone up by 37% thanks to the increase in the

0:00:30 > 0:00:34income tax threshold. Does the Chancellor join me in welcoming the

0:00:34 > 0:00:38fact the Government has directed assistance at those on the lowest

0:00:38 > 0:00:42earnings, and can the Chancellor assure the House that that excellent

0:00:42 > 0:00:49approach will continue to be at the heart of the Government's strategy?

0:00:49 > 0:00:52Mr Speaker, we are focused on the needs of those on the lowest pay who

0:00:52 > 0:00:57are in the workforce, and making work pay and particularly making low

0:00:57 > 0:01:04paid work pay is a priority. I would repeat what I said during the

0:01:04 > 0:01:08statement, that partly as a result of the introduction of the national

0:01:08 > 0:01:14living wage and it subsequent increased to £7 83 per hour, we now

0:01:14 > 0:01:17have income inequality in this country lower than at any point

0:01:17 > 0:01:22under the last Labour government. Income inequality falling in this

0:01:22 > 0:01:29country when it is rising in all other G7 countries.

0:01:29 > 0:01:34This statement was an opportunity for the Government to ease the

0:01:34 > 0:01:38burden on care providers by offering a solution to the sleeping crisis.

0:01:38 > 0:01:43Sleeping shifts are an integral part of public services which government

0:01:43 > 0:01:47has a statutory obligation to provide. Has the Government ruled

0:01:47 > 0:01:52out fully paying the six years of back pay entitled to low paid care

0:01:52 > 0:02:01workers directly? I'm just not sure of the end of her

0:02:01 > 0:02:04question there. If she is asking whether the Government has ruled

0:02:04 > 0:02:08out... The Government has not ruled out anything. We are still looking

0:02:08 > 0:02:12at this issue. Of course these workers must have the page to which

0:02:12 > 0:02:17they are entitled and which they should have been paid, and what we

0:02:17 > 0:02:21are doing, and the Cabinet Office is leading on this -- must have the pay

0:02:21 > 0:02:24to which they are entitled. We are looking at how to deal with this in

0:02:24 > 0:02:29a way that does not have negative impacts on the provision of care.

0:02:29 > 0:02:34Youth unemployment has fallen 55% in south-east Queensland under the

0:02:34 > 0:02:37Conservatives, fantastic news. Does my honourable friend agree with me

0:02:37 > 0:02:41that the last thing young people in Teesside need is reckless borrowing

0:02:41 > 0:02:46to reverse that?My honourable friend is absolutely right. Parts of

0:02:46 > 0:02:49the country which have suffered for for too long from low levels of

0:02:49 > 0:02:53employment and investment have seen over the last few years investment

0:02:53 > 0:02:59coming in, much of that foreign investment. Employment increasing,

0:02:59 > 0:03:04wages rising. And they absolutely do not need to take risks with the kind

0:03:04 > 0:03:07of policies the right honourable gentleman opposite is proposing

0:03:07 > 0:03:10which would plunge us back into a place we have been before and have

0:03:10 > 0:03:16no wish to revisit. Mr Speaker, people in the same job

0:03:16 > 0:03:24should be entitled to the same day's pay, and the Chancellor continues to

0:03:24 > 0:03:29pretend to ignore this is for people under 25 -- ignore the fact it is

0:03:29 > 0:03:34not for people under 25. Apprentices, they will end a fool

0:03:34 > 0:03:42£13 less. Why does he believe in state-sponsored age discrimination?

0:03:42 > 0:03:47Youthe honourable lady will know, I think, that we also announced, due

0:03:47 > 0:03:51to come in in April again, record increases in the use of rates of

0:03:51 > 0:03:55minimum wage. But, look, we have had several exchanges during the course

0:03:55 > 0:03:59of this session. About the importance of maintaining low levels

0:03:59 > 0:04:04of youth unemployment, and the devastating effects of youth

0:04:04 > 0:04:07unemployment. What the Government does, and I am sorry if the

0:04:07 > 0:04:10honourable lady does not like this, but what the Government does is take

0:04:10 > 0:04:16the advice of the low pay commission about the impact of different levels

0:04:16 > 0:04:20of pay rates on employment prospects. And we balance the need

0:04:20 > 0:04:24to give people a fair wage with the need to ensure that we maintain high

0:04:24 > 0:04:28levels of youth employment in the interests of those people

0:04:28 > 0:04:35themselves, and in the interests of our economy.I welcome the

0:04:35 > 0:04:39projections that real wages will increase in the coming year. That

0:04:39 > 0:04:42can only continue longer term if we improve our productivity. In that

0:04:42 > 0:04:47context can I welcome what the Chancellor said about the human

0:04:47 > 0:04:50capital long-term endeavour? And the improvements we have seen in

0:04:50 > 0:04:55productivity over the last six months.My honourable friend is

0:04:55 > 0:04:58right to draw attention to two quarters of very good productivity

0:04:58 > 0:05:05data. Mr Speaker, I don't want to change policy or a pervert on the

0:05:05 > 0:05:12basis of two quarters of data because it can be revised -- I do

0:05:12 > 0:05:18not want to change policy or pivot on the basis of two quarters. But I

0:05:18 > 0:05:22think we might be at the basis of a town on productivity performance in

0:05:22 > 0:05:31this economy.Liverpool has many success stories, but 30% of children

0:05:31 > 0:05:35are in poverty, and public services are under pressure as Liverpool

0:05:35 > 0:05:39council loses 60% of its funding, and the whole economy is threatened

0:05:39 > 0:05:44by Brexit. What will the Chancellor do differently to address these

0:05:44 > 0:05:49injustices?Obviously the best way out of poverty is to get people into

0:05:49 > 0:05:56work, and the proportion of work is at its lowest -- the proportion of

0:05:56 > 0:06:04workless households is at its lowest level. She will know two thirds of

0:06:04 > 0:06:08children less are in absolute poverty than when we began. Our

0:06:08 > 0:06:11strategy is to drive economic growth across our country, across the

0:06:11 > 0:06:16regions of our country, working with the elected mayors and the devolved

0:06:16 > 0:06:20authorities to ensure the investment needed goes in, in all corners of

0:06:20 > 0:06:25the British economy to deliver the growth that is the only way to get

0:06:25 > 0:06:32people sustainably out of poverty and into well-paid work.Can I

0:06:32 > 0:06:37congratulate the Chancellor on his progress to date? But now I ask him

0:06:37 > 0:06:43to look at investing in a long-term innovative strategy and plan for the

0:06:43 > 0:06:47transport infrastructure, including road, rail, infrastructure and

0:06:47 > 0:06:51siege, in the south-west, to drive productivity, north and south of the

0:06:51 > 0:06:56peninsula, and to include a commitment to such a strategy in the

0:06:56 > 0:06:58Autumn Statement, to build a great south-west to rival the northern

0:06:58 > 0:07:05powerhouse. We thank him for his support. It is welcome but not

0:07:05 > 0:07:09enough.She will have to think of a snappy name for it, and if she can

0:07:09 > 0:07:12please let me know. Of course we are investing already in the south-west

0:07:12 > 0:07:24and she will know that the crucial programme vital for transport artery

0:07:24 > 0:07:27feeding the south-west, the A303, and our investment in that. But I

0:07:27 > 0:07:30will say that I know many of the bids for the housing infrastructure

0:07:30 > 0:07:34fund have come from authorities in the south-west, and we are acutely

0:07:34 > 0:07:38conscious of the fact that as we ask them to build more homes we have to

0:07:38 > 0:07:40provide them with the resource to be able to build the supporting

0:07:40 > 0:07:44infrastructure, and that is the purpose of the Housing

0:07:44 > 0:07:47Infrastructure Funds and I hope she will have some good news when my

0:07:47 > 0:07:49right honourable friend the housing minister makes announcements

0:07:49 > 0:07:55intercourse. The number of apprenticeship starts

0:07:55 > 0:07:58plummeted after the botched introduction of the apprenticeship

0:07:58 > 0:08:02levy last year. I welcome the additional amount the Chancellor has

0:08:02 > 0:08:06announced for apprenticeships in school businesses, but does he

0:08:06 > 0:08:10recognise to get anywhere near the 3 million target by 2020 will require

0:08:10 > 0:08:15much more radical action? Would he return to this at the time of the

0:08:15 > 0:08:20Budget?I am grateful to the right honourable gentleman. Our target and

0:08:20 > 0:08:23commitment is to deliver those by 2020. The introduction of the

0:08:23 > 0:08:27apprenticeship levy change the game and we were always anticipating it

0:08:27 > 0:08:34would have an impact on the profile of starts. The announcement today of

0:08:34 > 0:08:38the additional £80 million is specifically targeted at small

0:08:38 > 0:08:41non-levy paying businesses to help them take on apprentices. The other

0:08:41 > 0:08:45thing that will happen in a couple of weeks' time at the beginning of

0:08:45 > 0:08:49April is large businesses who do pay the levy will be allowed to transfer

0:08:49 > 0:08:5310% of their levy paid to small businesses in their supply chain to

0:08:53 > 0:08:57support their engagement of and training of apprentices. But of

0:08:57 > 0:09:01course we will keep this programme under very close review. It is a

0:09:01 > 0:09:03commitment we have to deliver, and if we need to intervene in a

0:09:03 > 0:09:12different way we will.Page 193 of the report states, the future is

0:09:12 > 0:09:16uncertain and the likelihood of unexpected political developments

0:09:16 > 0:09:20leave the significant risk to public finance forecast. Can I ask the

0:09:20 > 0:09:23Chancellor if he sees any of those political downside risk sitting

0:09:23 > 0:09:28directly in front of them? LAUGHTER

0:09:28 > 0:09:41Yes, Mr Speaker, and I have made the point already to one of the right

0:09:41 > 0:09:45honourable members opposite, that conversation with businesses...

0:09:45 > 0:09:49Maybe I should just sit down, Mr Speaker, whilst the right honourable

0:09:49 > 0:09:56gentleman conducts his conversation? I made the point earlier that

0:09:56 > 0:09:59businesses in conversation identify two risks they are concerned about.

0:09:59 > 0:10:04The risk of bad Brexit deal, which will have an impact on the economy,

0:10:04 > 0:10:07and the risk of the right honourable gentleman opposite ever getting his

0:10:07 > 0:10:11hands on any of the levers of power in our economy, and of the two there

0:10:11 > 0:10:19is no doubt that business, expressed in the voice of Paul Dresser this

0:10:19 > 0:10:25morning, business regards the risk of the Right honourable gentleman

0:10:25 > 0:10:29being by far the bigger.The Chancellor claims spending on

0:10:29 > 0:10:34disabled people has gone up, but we know that cuts to social security

0:10:34 > 0:10:37will hit disabled people the hardest. The Chancellor also spoke

0:10:37 > 0:10:41about apologies. Would he like to apologise to the millions of

0:10:41 > 0:10:46disabled people that he blamed for low productivity?Of course I did no

0:10:46 > 0:10:55such thing. Well, no, I didn't. Mr Speaker, we spend over £50 billion a

0:10:55 > 0:10:58year on benefits to support disabled people and people with health

0:10:58 > 0:11:04conditions, a record high. It is £7.5 billion higher, in real terms,

0:11:04 > 0:11:11since 2010. There is a share of GDP. Our public spending on disability

0:11:11 > 0:11:18and incapacity is the second highest in the G7. 2.5% of our GDP, 6% of

0:11:18 > 0:11:23all Government spending.My right honourable friend has struck the

0:11:23 > 0:11:27right note between the need for financial discipline and justifiable

0:11:27 > 0:11:31need for investment in public service. With this in mind with the

0:11:31 > 0:11:34autumn budget, will they ensure additional funding is provided for

0:11:34 > 0:11:39schools to ensure the successful fermentation of the National Funding

0:11:39 > 0:11:44Formula which we welcomed in Stockport.My right honourable

0:11:44 > 0:11:48friend the member for Putney, as a former Education Secretary,

0:11:48 > 0:11:53announced that the funding formula would be introduced in such a way

0:11:53 > 0:11:58that we would protect the per capita spend per pupil, and we would

0:11:58 > 0:12:02guarantee every school, every school, would receive a cash terms

0:12:02 > 0:12:08increase, and that guaranteed stands today.My right honourable friend

0:12:08 > 0:12:10the Shadow Chancellor talked about the increasing number of children

0:12:10 > 0:12:15being taken into care. In Liverpool there has been an 11% increase in

0:12:15 > 0:12:20the last 12 months alone. Northwest local authorities wrote to the

0:12:20 > 0:12:23Chancellor last month calling for additional funds to address the

0:12:23 > 0:12:28growing crisis in children's social care. Can I ask him to address this

0:12:28 > 0:12:32growing crisis, and do so as a matter of urgency?As I said

0:12:32 > 0:12:40earlier, spending on support for the most vulnerable children has

0:12:40 > 0:12:45increased by £500 million since 2010, and I think a distinction can

0:12:45 > 0:12:51be drawn Lucas Mata. The right honourable gentleman -- can be drawn

0:12:51 > 0:12:55here. There is distinction to be drawn and I think he has made the

0:12:55 > 0:12:59point, between services provided to the most vulnerable children,

0:12:59 > 0:13:02children in care, children in the adoption and fostering process, and

0:13:02 > 0:13:06children at risk, and the wider children's services budget. But

0:13:06 > 0:13:15repeat again, we provide £225 billion of spending power to local

0:13:15 > 0:13:18authorities over the five-year period. It is for local authorities

0:13:18 > 0:13:24to decide how they allocate that spending.

0:13:24 > 0:13:27There can be no truer test of a government's commitment to fairness

0:13:27 > 0:13:32than its commitment to the next generation. There are 7000 young

0:13:32 > 0:13:37people who started apprentices in Redditch who would agree. Can he

0:13:37 > 0:13:40tell us more about the funds put aside to help more small businesses

0:13:40 > 0:13:45to access apprenticeships, and would he agree that the best place for his

0:13:45 > 0:13:48construction skills village is in Redditch, a new town in the heart of

0:13:48 > 0:13:53the country?I am glad to tell the honourable lady that there will be

0:13:53 > 0:14:0020 construction skills villages. So we look forward to the bid from

0:14:00 > 0:14:05Redditch, and I am sure it will be considered. But I mentioned earlier

0:14:05 > 0:14:10that my right honourable friend the Education Secretary is putting an

0:14:10 > 0:14:13extra £80 million specifically to support small businesses who are

0:14:13 > 0:14:19non-levy payers with the costs of engaging an apprentice. At the same

0:14:19 > 0:14:23time, from April, many small businesses will benefit from the

0:14:23 > 0:14:25flexibility that allows large business levy payers to transfer 10%

0:14:25 > 0:14:29of their levy fund to small businesses in their supply chain to

0:14:29 > 0:14:35support them. The indication I have from talking to the CBI and other

0:14:35 > 0:14:39organisations is that businesses are very keen to do this and many of

0:14:39 > 0:14:46them will make such transfers.Are the OBR right in calculating the UK

0:14:46 > 0:14:52will be making payments to the EU until 2064 as part of the divorce

0:14:52 > 0:14:57settlement, and that this will not include any new commitments that the

0:14:57 > 0:15:00British government may make in the remaining parts of the negotiation?

0:15:00 > 0:15:08Would it not be better just to stay in?The honourable gentleman is

0:15:08 > 0:15:12referring to the three parts of the payment profile. There are payments

0:15:12 > 0:15:16during the two years of the implementation period, there are

0:15:16 > 0:15:22payments as the EU dispenses the so-called day over the following few

0:15:22 > 0:15:27years and then there is a very long tail of what will be very small

0:15:27 > 0:15:33payments which relate to pensions. By their very nature, they will

0:15:33 > 0:15:42stretch over a long period, but they are very small amounts of money.

0:15:42 > 0:15:45Carlisle Lake District airport is about to open. We have garden

0:15:45 > 0:15:48village in the south of the city and there are prospects of a borderlands

0:15:48 > 0:15:51growth deal. With the Chancellor agree that the only way to grow the

0:15:51 > 0:15:54economy and balance the books is through such investments, and would

0:15:54 > 0:15:58he also agree that it is important for the government to support such

0:15:58 > 0:16:02local initiatives, as they will help rebalance the economy and sort our

0:16:02 > 0:16:09finances?Yes. It is local governments and local people and

0:16:09 > 0:16:13businesses that understand best how to grow the economy is of their

0:16:13 > 0:16:18regions. I welcome the initiative is he has mentioned. I am aware of the

0:16:18 > 0:16:22garden village initiative and I look forward to being able to visit in

0:16:22 > 0:16:29the spring.Isn't it true that young people in our communities are paying

0:16:29 > 0:16:33the biggest price for this government's choices and our

0:16:33 > 0:16:37failures? Local government is facing a funding gap of 5.8 billion by 20

0:16:37 > 0:16:4420. My counsel, Hounslow, has had a 40% cut in income since 2010, with

0:16:44 > 0:16:49more to come. 400,000 more children are in poverty than five years ago.

0:16:49 > 0:16:54In some wards in my constituency, that is now hitting 40%. He asked to

0:16:54 > 0:17:02be judged on his record. Is this a record that he is proud of?Yes, I

0:17:02 > 0:17:05am, because the figures the honourable lady gives are not quite

0:17:05 > 0:17:11right. There are 200,000 fewer children in absolute poverty than

0:17:11 > 0:17:22there were in 2010. Absolute poverty is the relevant measure. The crucial

0:17:22 > 0:17:25point that the honourable lady has skirted around is that after the

0:17:25 > 0:17:30financial crash during the last Labour government, we could have

0:17:30 > 0:17:35gone down a route which many of our continental neighbours went down

0:17:35 > 0:17:38which would have seen hundreds of thousands if not millions of young

0:17:38 > 0:17:42people cast onto scrapheap of unemployment and left their

0:17:42 > 0:17:47potentially for decades. We did not go down that route. And we have seen

0:17:47 > 0:17:52youth unemployment in this country relatively low and falling. That is

0:17:52 > 0:17:57a huge benefit to the next generation, which will benefit from

0:17:57 > 0:18:04their engagement in the workforce and as they go forward, to

0:18:04 > 0:18:09benefiting from rising living standards.I welcome my right

0:18:09 > 0:18:12honourable friend's statement and the balanced approach to the economy

0:18:12 > 0:18:17he detailed. I particularly welcome the attention on digital skills.

0:18:17 > 0:18:20These are the main issues businesses are raising with me. I am hoping

0:18:20 > 0:18:26Yorkshire will be one of the local allocations. Will he continue to

0:18:26 > 0:18:28focus upon fibre and digital as critical to boosting our national

0:18:28 > 0:18:35productivity?Yes. If we don't have these enabling network technologies,

0:18:35 > 0:18:42a good fibre-optic network and good digital technologies, we will not be

0:18:42 > 0:18:46able to exploit the technologies of the fourth Industrial Revolution.

0:18:46 > 0:18:51The OBR says that real earnings growth in the next five years is

0:18:51 > 0:18:55expected to remain subdued, averaging 0.7% a year growth and

0:18:55 > 0:19:00real household disposable income per person is expected to average only

0:19:00 > 0:19:030.4% per year. So why won't the Chancellor properly fund his

0:19:03 > 0:19:07government departments to ensure that the public sector pay freeze is

0:19:07 > 0:19:12properly lifted, as has been done in Scotland?The public sector pay

0:19:12 > 0:19:17freeze has been lifted. We have removed at the 1% cap, so it is up

0:19:17 > 0:19:22to departmental secretaries of state to make appropriate recommendations,

0:19:22 > 0:19:29provide appropriate evidence to pay review bodies. But we do expect

0:19:29 > 0:19:33them, where they are recommending settlements above the level that

0:19:33 > 0:19:39they are already funded for, to use workforce management measures and

0:19:39 > 0:19:43efficiency improvement ushers negotiated with the workforce to

0:19:43 > 0:19:49ensure that over time, those things are funded through higher efficiency

0:19:49 > 0:19:54and higher productivity.The Chancellor is right to focus on how

0:19:54 > 0:19:58the tax system might be used to encourage improvements in the

0:19:58 > 0:20:02environment. The packaging industry recognises the need to reduce waste

0:20:02 > 0:20:08and will respond positively to his call. I ask that he includes firstly

0:20:08 > 0:20:13that it is people who cause litter, and he spoke about the need for

0:20:13 > 0:20:16behaviour change, and we recognise the important role the packaging as

0:20:16 > 0:20:21in reducing food waste by keeping food fresh for longer.Yes, of

0:20:21 > 0:20:24course. The point of having a call for evidence is to make sure that

0:20:24 > 0:20:30the decisions we make are based on full knowledge. He makes an

0:20:30 > 0:20:33important point that it would be massively shooting ourselves in the

0:20:33 > 0:20:41foot to make a change in relation to packaging which then increased food

0:20:41 > 0:20:46waste and the energy cost of food that was wasted.Why is the

0:20:46 > 0:20:50Chancellor refusing to share the light at the end of his tunnel with

0:20:50 > 0:20:54grieving parents who are struggling to pay for their children's

0:20:54 > 0:20:58funerals? Their lives are forever blighted in darkness. A children's

0:20:58 > 0:21:02funeral fund is the dignified, compassionate and sympathetic thing

0:21:02 > 0:21:08to do.Am grateful to the honourable lady. She is a tireless campaigner

0:21:08 > 0:21:12on this issue and both I and my right honourable friend the Prime

0:21:12 > 0:21:16Minister have heard her pleas on behalf of parents in this terrible

0:21:16 > 0:21:22situation. But I am sure she does recognise that this is not a

0:21:22 > 0:21:26physical event. There have been no physical announcements today, but I

0:21:26 > 0:21:30am certain she will want to make a representation to me ahead of the

0:21:30 > 0:21:36Budget in the autumn.I thank the Chancellor for his very spring-like

0:21:36 > 0:21:40statement. It is good to hear that there is light at the end of the

0:21:40 > 0:21:47tunnel. But could I ask what plans he has two support our vital £90

0:21:47 > 0:21:50billion creative industries sector, which is growing in my constituency

0:21:50 > 0:21:56of Clacton?Creative industries are an increasingly important part of

0:21:56 > 0:22:01the UK economy and one in which we have a significant comparative

0:22:01 > 0:22:05advantage. The best way the government can support the creative

0:22:05 > 0:22:10industries, apart from the obvious one of training and Skilling, is

0:22:10 > 0:22:13through supporting the roll-out of digital technologies on which so

0:22:13 > 0:22:22many of the creative industries these days depend.The Chancellor

0:22:22 > 0:22:27will know of the families working on the national minimum wage. Does he

0:22:27 > 0:22:31agree with the Rowntree foundation, who have demonstrated that in a

0:22:31 > 0:22:35two-parent family, one working with two children, because of tax credit

0:22:35 > 0:22:42cuts, will be £450 a year worse off? That is not fair, is it?The

0:22:42 > 0:22:50national living wage has given a pay rise of more than £2000 a year to

0:22:50 > 0:22:56anyone in full-time work since it was introduced in 2015. It is not

0:22:56 > 0:23:01just the national living wage, it is the increase in the personal

0:23:01 > 0:23:05allowance which means people are now able to keep more of what they take

0:23:05 > 0:23:09home. And because it is an allowance, it disproportionately

0:23:09 > 0:23:16benefits those on the lowest earnings.Fourth Industrial

0:23:16 > 0:23:19Revolution technologies are transforming productivity across the

0:23:19 > 0:23:23country: not particularly amongst the SME sector. As my right

0:23:23 > 0:23:25honourable friend considers future spending priorities, can I urge him

0:23:25 > 0:23:29to accelerate support for our entrepreneurs who create the wealth

0:23:29 > 0:23:34of the future?Yes, my honourable friend is a tireless advocate of the

0:23:34 > 0:23:37technology that will fuel the fourth Industrial Revolution. The important

0:23:37 > 0:23:42thing is that while we are talking about it, this is actually happening

0:23:42 > 0:23:44across the country. These technologies are actually being used

0:23:44 > 0:23:48by large, medium and small businesses. There are not just

0:23:48 > 0:23:53something in the laboratory or the university classroom, they are

0:23:53 > 0:23:55happening in the business parks across Britain and they will

0:23:55 > 0:24:01transform the way we live and work. I'm sure the Chancellor will agree

0:24:01 > 0:24:05that it is not talking down the economy to report in this placed the

0:24:05 > 0:24:09real experiences of the people we represent, the majority of whom are

0:24:09 > 0:24:13not going to see real average wage incomes exceeding the pre-crash

0:24:13 > 0:24:18levels until 2022. Does he not agree that all of the measures announced

0:24:18 > 0:24:21today and the rhetoric will not bigger difference to the people who

0:24:21 > 0:24:25need it the most until their average incomes increase above the pre-crash

0:24:25 > 0:24:33levels? When will that happen? Raising real incomes is the

0:24:33 > 0:24:40principal target we focus on. The country suffered a recession after

0:24:40 > 0:24:47the financial crisis which wiped out 6% of our national income. We are

0:24:47 > 0:24:50rebuilding our economy from that crisis, hindered unhampered by the

0:24:50 > 0:24:54fact that the previous government was ill-prepared for the crisis when

0:24:54 > 0:25:01it came. We are determined to make sure that our economy and our public

0:25:01 > 0:25:05finances are in good shape to deal with the economic cycle in the

0:25:05 > 0:25:09future, because we do not believe we have abolished that economic cycle

0:25:09 > 0:25:14and we do have to prepare for future downturns, because that is the

0:25:14 > 0:25:22nature of economic life.I welcome the progress that has been made in

0:25:22 > 0:25:26reducing the debt and deficit, but with the Chancellor confirm that we

0:25:26 > 0:25:30are still spending £50 billion in debt interest, more than the Armed

0:25:30 > 0:25:32Forces and the police force combined? If we don't get control of

0:25:32 > 0:25:37this, there will be less money for the things we value like the housing

0:25:37 > 0:25:41infrastructure fund, Oxfordshire's excellent submission of which is so

0:25:41 > 0:25:45important to my constituents.My honourable friend is right. This is

0:25:45 > 0:25:50current spending, £50 billion that we could be spending on hospitals,

0:25:50 > 0:25:54schools or indeed on investment in infrastructure. The honourable

0:25:54 > 0:26:01gentleman opposite's answer to this is to increase the amount of

0:26:01 > 0:26:04borrowing we have, to increase the amount of money we are pouring down

0:26:04 > 0:26:09the drain every year on debt interest, reducing the amount of

0:26:09 > 0:26:17money available for public services. That cannot be the right way to go.

0:26:17 > 0:26:21In spite of the claims for what will happen to real wages on April full

0:26:21 > 0:26:27state, the fact is that real wages are now lower than they were in 2010

0:26:27 > 0:26:31and debt has grown over twice as fast under this government than it

0:26:31 > 0:26:33did on the previous Labour government in spite of the global

0:26:33 > 0:26:39economic crash in 2008. So will the Chancellor agree that his strategy

0:26:39 > 0:26:43is failing people like my constituents, who are suffering from

0:26:43 > 0:26:49£6 billion of cuts to social care and can no longer get care packages,

0:26:49 > 0:26:53so they can die at home surrounded by their loved ones, but instead are

0:26:53 > 0:26:59stuck in hospital?I don't agree with the honourable lady. Her

0:26:59 > 0:27:06numbers are wrong, as I am sure she knows. The soaring deficit in

0:27:06 > 0:27:102009-10 created a legacy that of course was going to lead to

0:27:10 > 0:27:14increasing debt. Our challenge has been to get the deficit down so that

0:27:14 > 0:27:20debt can now start to fall. And as debt starts to fall, we are able to

0:27:20 > 0:27:25fund our public services, to invest in Britain's future, to provide

0:27:25 > 0:27:28relief for hard-pressed families and small businesses do using their tax

0:27:28 > 0:27:34burden, and that is what we intend to continue to do.A number of

0:27:34 > 0:27:37honourable members have mentioned the next generation. Is it not the

0:27:37 > 0:27:41case that only this government's approach can deliver true

0:27:41 > 0:27:45intergenerational fairness, because the alternative is ever increased

0:27:45 > 0:27:50borrowing, which will be put on the shoulders of young people?My

0:27:50 > 0:27:53honourable friend is right. This is a point that needs to be made more

0:27:53 > 0:27:56often. When the right honourable gentleman opposite talks about

0:27:56 > 0:28:01borrowing an extra £100 billion, 350 billion, whatever it is thinking

0:28:01 > 0:28:07about this week, when he talks about nationalising industry for £190

0:28:07 > 0:28:13billion or whatever it is, he is talking about burdening the next

0:28:13 > 0:28:18generation with yet more debt that will blight their future and limit

0:28:18 > 0:28:21their chances. It isn't fair. We must make sure he never gets the

0:28:21 > 0:28:29chance to do it.There are some small businesses in Bury still

0:28:29 > 0:28:32picking up the pieces from the Carillion collapse. Small business

0:28:32 > 0:28:36confidence in the north-west is at its lowest in four years, with UK

0:28:36 > 0:28:40skills shortages blamed for some 3 billion in lost earnings. Mr

0:28:40 > 0:28:44Speaker, he chose to come to the House today to give us this spring

0:28:44 > 0:28:48statement and he had nothing to say. We had a fake news forecast with

0:28:48 > 0:28:52nothing for the real job creators. Will he give some certainty for the

0:28:52 > 0:28:58small businesses, providing the jobs in towns like mine, and stop this

0:28:58 > 0:29:01outsourcing to post up vehicles like Carillion that appeared to be too

0:29:01 > 0:29:08big to fail before they do fail?

0:29:08 > 0:29:14The reason I have come to the House to make a statement is because the

0:29:14 > 0:29:18OBR has published its second report of the fiscal year. It is mandated

0:29:18 > 0:29:21by Parliament to produce two reports a year and I think the House would

0:29:21 > 0:29:26have regarded it as a gross disco to date if I had published a report

0:29:26 > 0:29:29without coming to the House to answer questions -- a gross

0:29:29 > 0:29:34discourtesy. I am glad he mentioned skill shortages, because he will

0:29:34 > 0:29:38recognise that whilst they are a serious problem this is in a sense

0:29:38 > 0:29:42better problem to have than skilled people looking for employment. The

0:29:42 > 0:29:47work is there, the jobs are there, the economic growth is there. Now we

0:29:47 > 0:29:51have to respond by delivering the skills that people need. On

0:29:51 > 0:29:59outsourcing, we will to pursue the best value for money for every pound

0:29:59 > 0:30:02of taxpayer money we spend. Where that involves collaborating with the

0:30:02 > 0:30:07private sector, that is what we will do, and the way we have handed the

0:30:07 > 0:30:14situation with Carillion has meant the public purse has not had to bail

0:30:14 > 0:30:18out private company will services have continued to be provided.I

0:30:18 > 0:30:24would like to join the SNP finance secretary in Hollywood by

0:30:24 > 0:30:27acknowledging the block grant coming which is a real terms increase over

0:30:27 > 0:30:34the next few years. Considering the law increase in Scotland GDP growth

0:30:34 > 0:30:37that is forecast, will my right honourable friend commit driving

0:30:37 > 0:30:40economic growth through all our constituencies such as the

0:30:40 > 0:30:47Clackmannanshire city deal.Yes, Mr Speaker, it is just a pity the SNP

0:30:47 > 0:30:49spokesperson here did not feel inclined to acknowledge the same

0:30:49 > 0:30:54thing. But, yes, she is right. We are a government for the whole of

0:30:54 > 0:30:59the UK, and it is not the Scottish people's fault that they have a

0:30:59 > 0:31:02Government adopting policies that are depressing economic growth in

0:31:02 > 0:31:06Scotland and will depress it further in the months and years ahead. We

0:31:06 > 0:31:10will go on delivering policies designed to improve the economy

0:31:10 > 0:31:13across the whole of the United Kingdom, including the growth deals

0:31:13 > 0:31:20in Scotland.Last week it was revealed the Ministry of Housing

0:31:20 > 0:31:23returned £1.1 billion to the Treasury in news Housing money of

0:31:23 > 0:31:27the last two years. It should have been spent on re-cladding unsafe

0:31:27 > 0:31:31tower blocks after the Grenfell Tower. Will the Chancellor uses

0:31:31 > 0:31:34autumn budget to fund the work required to keep our tower blocks

0:31:34 > 0:31:38safe and the residents inside them safe as well?Mr Speaker, I have

0:31:38 > 0:31:42made the point and my right honourable friend has made the

0:31:42 > 0:31:46point, the Housing Minister, that local authorities, social landlords,

0:31:46 > 0:31:50who have blocks needing the cladding, they should carry out that

0:31:50 > 0:31:57work. Any work required for urgent safety reasons should be done. Any

0:31:57 > 0:32:03authority or housing association unable to fund that work, that has a

0:32:03 > 0:32:10genuine inability to fund it, should get in touch with the Department for

0:32:10 > 0:32:12Housing Communities And Local Government who will work with them

0:32:12 > 0:32:16to find an appropriate solution. Safety critical work must be carried

0:32:16 > 0:32:19out. That is a legal obligation of the landlord and we will work with

0:32:19 > 0:32:26them to make sure it is. I'd like to welcome my right

0:32:26 > 0:32:32honourable friend's continued commitment to increasing the housing

0:32:32 > 0:32:35supply. And to mention that error was construction village as well.

0:32:35 > 0:32:42But does he agree with me it is measures such as the cut in stamp

0:32:42 > 0:32:46duty for first-time buyers that will help many of my constituents -- to

0:32:46 > 0:32:51mention the Erewash construction. That it will help them get on the

0:32:51 > 0:32:55housing ladder? The housing investment package we

0:32:55 > 0:33:00have put together is important because it has ensured financial

0:33:00 > 0:33:04support will not be the constraining factor in building more homes in

0:33:04 > 0:33:07this country. We have other constraints, skills constraints,

0:33:07 > 0:33:12land supply constraints, materials supply constraints, but finance will

0:33:12 > 0:33:18be available. The measure I announced in the

0:33:18 > 0:33:21autumn budget, removing stamp duty for a million first-time buyers, it

0:33:21 > 0:33:26will allow a million mostly young people once again to be able to

0:33:26 > 0:33:33aspire to the dream of home ownership.Mr Speaker, the

0:33:33 > 0:33:37Chancellor claims he will ensure cash is available for those that

0:33:37 > 0:33:40need it, and he further claims his is the party of small business. If

0:33:40 > 0:33:45he stands by this, will he come too near, Granton and Aviemore to

0:33:45 > 0:33:51explain the business reply with over 70% of shares in the Royal Bank of

0:33:51 > 0:33:53Scotland, at his command he is failing to block the closure of

0:33:53 > 0:34:01their branches which should make it more difficult to do business in

0:34:01 > 0:34:06Scotland...It is absolutely always a pleasure to visit Nairn but I

0:34:06 > 0:34:10don't have a plan to do so right now. As he has told his right

0:34:10 > 0:34:18honourable friends on several occasions, as he has told his

0:34:18 > 0:34:21friends, we do not interfere with the Royal Bank of Scotland. The

0:34:21 > 0:34:25consultation we published today is about passion lists and digital

0:34:25 > 0:34:29payment systems but it specifically acknowledges, and I said this in my

0:34:29 > 0:34:33statement, we also have to ensure cash is available to people who need

0:34:33 > 0:34:37it. If you look at the consultation when it is published, he will see we

0:34:37 > 0:34:41are determined to address that issue, and I hope you will engage in

0:34:41 > 0:34:47that consultation. The Chancellor is absolutely right

0:34:47 > 0:34:52to look at the impact of the VAT threshold on business. It is a

0:34:52 > 0:34:56disincentive to growth and an incentive to avoid tax to cash

0:34:56 > 0:35:03deals. But does he agree it is not just the financial implications in

0:35:03 > 0:35:07registry of VAT but also the administrative impact of that? Is it

0:35:07 > 0:35:11an appropriate time to look at the entire system of the VAT regime?I

0:35:11 > 0:35:15think that would be rather dramatically widening the scope of

0:35:15 > 0:35:21the intended consultation. I would remind the House that when I

0:35:21 > 0:35:24referred to this issue at the autumn budget I did say that I was not

0:35:24 > 0:35:34minded to more VAT threshold because the VAT threshold at its current

0:35:34 > 0:35:40level does keep a lot of small businesses out of the burden of VAT

0:35:40 > 0:35:43but we want to ensure this cliff edge effect which does have a

0:35:43 > 0:35:47damaging impact on businesses trying to grow is addressed -- I did say

0:35:47 > 0:35:54that I was not inclined to lower the VAT threshold.There is a reason why

0:35:54 > 0:35:58we need to invest in our public services. In York schools have gone

0:35:58 > 0:36:05from the seventh worst funded to the very worst funded authority. Our

0:36:05 > 0:36:09NHS, and no social housing has been built. Should not the Chancellor

0:36:09 > 0:36:16invest in our children in the -- are children, in the set, and provide

0:36:16 > 0:36:19homes for the homeless?I'm afraid it is characteristic of the party

0:36:19 > 0:36:23opposite they are only able to see the world through the lens of

0:36:23 > 0:36:27inputs. The reality is this. Since 2010 we have increased the number of

0:36:27 > 0:36:31schools that are good or outstanding, so 90% of schools are

0:36:31 > 0:36:35now good or outstanding. 1.9 million more children are being taught in

0:36:35 > 0:36:41good or outstanding schools. That is the metric that matters to parents,

0:36:41 > 0:36:45and the children themselves, in terms of their life chances. It is

0:36:45 > 0:36:52not always just about the money. It is about the outcomes.I welcome the

0:36:52 > 0:36:58measures introduced by the and to help the oil and gas industry

0:36:58 > 0:37:01including a 2 billion package of support including the transferable

0:37:01 > 0:37:05tax, a much-needed shot in the arm. With oil and gas industry set to

0:37:05 > 0:37:09contribute over a billion impact to the Treasury this financial year,

0:37:09 > 0:37:12can my right honourable friend tell me what further steps the Government

0:37:12 > 0:37:17can take to support this vital industry?We are committed to the

0:37:17 > 0:37:21oil and gas industry and as my honourable friend knows, we are

0:37:21 > 0:37:25committed to measures that will ensure that every drop of

0:37:25 > 0:37:29economically recoverable oil and gas in the UK Continental Shelf is

0:37:29 > 0:37:33recovered, that is very much in the interests of the Scottish economy,

0:37:33 > 0:37:37the UK economy and Her Majesty's Treasury, and I am delighted that

0:37:37 > 0:37:42the increase in the oil price, together with the uptake in activity

0:37:42 > 0:37:46as a result of it and as a result of the measures we have announced,

0:37:46 > 0:37:50means the contribution of the oil sector to the UK Treasury will again

0:37:50 > 0:38:00become positive in the year to come. The party opposite has capped the

0:38:00 > 0:38:03Welsh government Government by around £1 billion a year since 2010.

0:38:03 > 0:38:07The knock-on impact of that on public services in Wales and on

0:38:07 > 0:38:11Welsh local government to deliver key services has been huge. Will the

0:38:11 > 0:38:15Chancellor today apologised for the failed Tory austerity that has

0:38:15 > 0:38:21caused so much damage to public services across the UK as well as in

0:38:21 > 0:38:24Wales, and given his outline of a rosy picture, will he set out what

0:38:24 > 0:38:28plans he has to adequately fund public services that many people

0:38:28 > 0:38:33rely on?Well, Mr Speaker on if I don't have the figures right hand,

0:38:33 > 0:38:36but if my memory serves me correctly, at the budget last year I

0:38:36 > 0:38:39was able to confirm Wales would receive over £1 billion of

0:38:39 > 0:38:43additional funding including as a result of changes to the formula

0:38:43 > 0:38:47that were agreed, so not down, but up, and additional billion pounds

0:38:47 > 0:38:53plus. The failure of services in Wales, which we catalogue regularly

0:38:53 > 0:38:57across this dispatch box, mainly in the Welsh health service, are a

0:38:57 > 0:39:03result of decisions made by the Welsh government. Priorities set by

0:39:03 > 0:39:09the Welsh government, not decisions made by the UK Government.Economies

0:39:09 > 0:39:12move in cycles. Does my right honourable friend agree that there

0:39:12 > 0:39:20is a moral case to ensure our public finances are in a state to help the

0:39:20 > 0:39:23poorest in our society, some of whom live in my constituency in

0:39:23 > 0:39:27Cheltenham? Does he also agree with me that is an approach the party

0:39:27 > 0:39:32opposite manifestly failed to take? He is right, they did, precisely

0:39:32 > 0:39:36because we have seen the devastating impact of being unprepared for what

0:39:36 > 0:39:43was a very serious economic downturn from a financial crash, it is

0:39:43 > 0:39:46precisely because of that we are determined to ensure the UK economy

0:39:46 > 0:39:51is robust lip repaired for the next normal cyclical downturn when it

0:39:51 > 0:39:54occurs. These are normal things, they happen in everyday economic

0:39:54 > 0:40:00life, and we must be able to right through them without damage to our

0:40:00 > 0:40:02economy and without the poorest in our society paying the price,

0:40:02 > 0:40:09because it is the poorest that always pay when Labour's model

0:40:09 > 0:40:13fails.Following the global financial crash the American

0:40:13 > 0:40:18recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 integers by Obama sought

0:40:18 > 0:40:22investment pumped into the US economy leading to the most

0:40:22 > 0:40:31sustained period of growth. -- by Obama. Which was the right

0:40:31 > 0:40:37ideological choice?The United States is in a different position

0:40:37 > 0:40:42from the United Kingdom. Sadly, we no longer operates the world's

0:40:42 > 0:40:48reserve currency. We are no longer able to borrow in the conditions the

0:40:48 > 0:40:52United States is able to borrow. Decisions for the United States

0:40:52 > 0:40:55economy are for the United States administration. The Government has

0:40:55 > 0:41:01made the right decisions for the UK economy, and the benefit of those

0:41:01 > 0:41:04decisions, the outcomes that we are now beginning to see, demonstrate

0:41:04 > 0:41:18the case for them.Order, presentation of Bill, John Mann.

0:41:18 > 0:41:23Housing and planning, local decision-making bill.Friday the

0:41:23 > 0:41:2816th of March, second reading. Thank you. Order. We come now to the Ten

0:41:28 > 0:41:33Minute Rule Motion. Mrs Theresa Villiers...Thank you, Mr Speaker. I

0:41:33 > 0:41:37beg to move we've be given to integers are built to prevent the

0:41:37 > 0:41:43Holocaust return of cultural objects act, 2009, from expiring on the 11th

0:41:43 > 0:41:49of November 20 19. Mr Speaker, it was on the 10th of November, 1938,

0:41:49 > 0:41:53when the horrors of the gnats or persecution began in earnest with

0:41:53 > 0:42:01the shameful episode known as Kristallnacht -- when the horrors of

0:42:01 > 0:42:07the Nazi persecution. The key focus of the violent attacks that took

0:42:07 > 0:42:12place was also property, the homes, buildings and businesses owned by

0:42:12 > 0:42:17Jewish people. Throughout the 1930s and 40s, property of all kinds was

0:42:17 > 0:42:23systematically stolen from millions of people, as part of Hitler's

0:42:23 > 0:42:30horrific genocidal campaign against Jewish elite mag Europe's Jewish

0:42:30 > 0:42:38community, including many precious works of art -- Europe's Jewish

0:42:38 > 0:42:43community. Around 1000 objects were pillaged during the Nazi that remain

0:42:43 > 0:42:49still hidden to this day. The horrific crimes of the Nazis can

0:42:49 > 0:42:53never be remedied, but there is action we can take to return works

0:42:53 > 0:42:58of art to the people from whom they were stolen. Mr Speaker, at the end

0:42:58 > 0:43:03of the last century there was growing international awareness of

0:43:03 > 0:43:08the risk that looted art might have inadvertently been acquired by

0:43:08 > 0:43:15museums and galleries. This led to the 1998 Washington Conference on

0:43:15 > 0:43:19Holocaust era assets. At that conference and number of countries

0:43:19 > 0:43:22including the United Kingdom pledged they would work to identify

0:43:22 > 0:43:26treasures stolen by the Nazis, and seek to return them to their

0:43:26 > 0:43:30rightful owners. Compared with other European countries it seems very

0:43:30 > 0:43:35little looted art found its way to the UK. But that should not be used

0:43:35 > 0:43:41as an excuse for in action. In 2000, the previous Labour government

0:43:41 > 0:43:48established a panel to consider claims from anyone who had lost

0:43:48 > 0:43:54possession of a cultural object in circumstances relating to the Nazi

0:43:54 > 0:44:02era. A key problem arose in 2002 when the areas of Doctor Feldman

0:44:02 > 0:44:06sought the return of drawings in the British Museum on the grounds they

0:44:06 > 0:44:12had been stolen by the Gestapo from his collection in March 1939, in

0:44:12 > 0:44:17what was then Czechoslovakia.

0:44:17 > 0:44:18The British Museum what was then Czechoslovakia.

0:44:18 > 0:44:18The British Museum wants what was then Czechoslovakia.

0:44:18 > 0:44:19The British Museum wants to what was then Czechoslovakia.

0:44:19 > 0:44:19The British Museum wants to return what was then Czechoslovakia.

0:44:19 > 0:44:20The British Museum wants to return these objects, but the High Court

0:44:20 > 0:44:25ruled that it could not lawfully do so. No matter what the moral case

0:44:25 > 0:44:30for giving the property back to the heirs of its owner, the museum was

0:44:30 > 0:44:35underrated binding statutory obligation not to give away items in

0:44:35 > 0:44:38its collection. A number of other national institutions were also

0:44:38 > 0:44:44subject to the same restriction. This and other similar cases were

0:44:44 > 0:44:49raised in Parliament in 2009 by Andrew Dismore, who was the MP for

0:44:49 > 0:44:55Hendon at the time. He brought forward a private member's bill to

0:44:55 > 0:44:57remove the statutory restrictions on national institutions such as the

0:44:57 > 0:45:03British Museum, which prevented them from returning works of art

0:45:03 > 0:45:10confiscated by the Nazis. With cross-party support, the Holocaust

0:45:10 > 0:45:15return of cultural objects Bill received royal assent on the 12th of

0:45:15 > 0:45:21November 2009. It provides that 17 national institutions named in the

0:45:21 > 0:45:26legislation have the power to return works of art to their rightful

0:45:26 > 0:45:29owners in cases where this is recommended by the advisory panel

0:45:29 > 0:45:37and approved by the Culture Secretary. But section four,

0:45:37 > 0:45:41subsection seven of that act contains a 10-year sunset clause.

0:45:41 > 0:45:47The effect of that is that the 2009 act will cease to have effect after

0:45:47 > 0:45:52the 11th of November next year. After that date, the situation is

0:45:52 > 0:45:57named in the legislation will no longer be able to return works of

0:45:57 > 0:46:02art to Holocaust survivors or to the families of those who perished in

0:46:02 > 0:46:08the genocide. The bill I am seeking leave today to bring in would keep

0:46:08 > 0:46:14the legislation on the statute book by repealing section four seven and

0:46:14 > 0:46:22thus removing the sunset clause. In my view, Parliament was right in

0:46:22 > 0:46:262009 to give our national museums the power to restore property lost

0:46:26 > 0:46:34in these terrible circumstances to their rightful owners. The

0:46:34 > 0:46:36legislation was subject to exacting scrutiny and was significantly

0:46:36 > 0:46:42amended and clarified during its passage through Parliament. It has

0:46:42 > 0:46:46worked well during its eight years on the statute book, resolving cases

0:46:46 > 0:46:55in a fair and balanced way. For example, take the 12th century

0:46:55 > 0:46:58manuscript. The advisory panel concluded that the manuscript had

0:46:58 > 0:47:07been looted during the chaos which followed the Allied bombing of that

0:47:07 > 0:47:09area in 1943. With the approval of the Secretary of State, the missal

0:47:09 > 0:47:14was returned to its owners in Italy. In 2015, a John Constable painting

0:47:14 > 0:47:17from the Tate Gallery was restored to its owner after the panel

0:47:17 > 0:47:20concluded that it had been stolen when the German army invaded

0:47:20 > 0:47:28Budapest in 1944. The 2009 act is a carefully targeted measure which

0:47:28 > 0:47:33applies to a defined and limited period and certain circumstances, so

0:47:33 > 0:47:36it does not open the door for a more contentious claim relating to

0:47:36 > 0:47:40objects brought to the UK in past centuries and under different

0:47:40 > 0:47:48circumstances. The act has not had a disruptive impact on our national

0:47:48 > 0:47:52museums. When the proposal to keep the measure on the statute book was

0:47:52 > 0:47:57announced in 2017, it was warmly welcomed by the museum community.

0:47:57 > 0:48:03Today, the director of the national gallery, Dr Gabrielle is an Audi,

0:48:03 > 0:48:08issued the following statement, saying "The museum community is

0:48:08 > 0:48:12committed to fair redress in the case of works taken wrongfully

0:48:12 > 0:48:16during the Holocaust and World War II. It is fully supportive of the

0:48:16 > 0:48:20proposal to amend the act by removing the so-called sunset

0:48:20 > 0:48:27clause. The task of identifying and returning objects with an incomplete

0:48:27 > 0:48:33history during the relevant period is by no means yet at an end. As

0:48:33 > 0:48:36recently as last September, the government hosted an international

0:48:36 > 0:48:41conference in London to consider how efforts to identify and give back

0:48:41 > 0:48:45works of art lost during the Holocaust could be accelerated. The

0:48:45 > 0:48:49UK has been at the forefront of global efforts to resolve these

0:48:49 > 0:48:54cases in a fair way, and the 2009 act has played an important part in

0:48:54 > 0:48:59that. The legislation had the backing of the last Labour

0:48:59 > 0:49:02government, and the Bill I am putting forward today has the

0:49:02 > 0:49:07support of the current Conservative government. I thank the DC MS for

0:49:07 > 0:49:10its work on this, including engaging with the Scottish Government with a

0:49:10 > 0:49:15view to securing their support, reflecting the fact that there are

0:49:15 > 0:49:20Scotland institutions included in the list in the legislation. There

0:49:20 > 0:49:25may still be potential claimants who are unaware of the location of

0:49:25 > 0:49:30artworks owned by their relatives who died in the Holocaust. So the

0:49:30 > 0:49:33moral case for this legislation remains as strong today as it was

0:49:33 > 0:49:41eight years ago. Indeed, the case is arguably stronger than it was in

0:49:41 > 0:49:452009. We have fewer and fewer Holocaust survivors still with us,

0:49:45 > 0:49:48and I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to all

0:49:48 > 0:49:53those survivors who live in my Chipping Barnet constituency. I have

0:49:53 > 0:49:57had the great honour to meet many of them during my years as their local

0:49:57 > 0:50:01MP. I thank them for all they do to ensure that the current generation

0:50:01 > 0:50:06hears their testimony first-hand as part of the efforts we must make as

0:50:06 > 0:50:09a society to ensure that the horrors of the Holocaust are never

0:50:09 > 0:50:16forgotten. Surely it would be heartless and wrong to deprive those

0:50:16 > 0:50:21last supporters of their right to recover treasured works of art.

0:50:21 > 0:50:25Nothing can make up for the trauma and suffering of those who

0:50:25 > 0:50:29experienced the Holocaust first-hand, or who lost loved ones

0:50:29 > 0:50:33in that horror. But at least we can give them back the pressures works

0:50:33 > 0:50:39of art which were stolen from them. That is what my proposal is designed

0:50:39 > 0:50:47to achieve, and I commend this bill to the House.The question is that

0:50:47 > 0:50:50the right honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. As many

0:50:50 > 0:50:57as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". The ayes have

0:50:57 > 0:51:08it, the ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring in the Bill?Bob

0:51:08 > 0:51:17Blackman, Stephen Crabb, Ian Austin, Mr Edward Vaizey, John Mann, Andrew

0:51:17 > 0:51:33Percy, Charles Elphick, Iain Duncan Smith, and myself.Theresa Villiers.

0:52:01 > 0:52:04Holocaust return of cultural objects amendment bill. Second reading what

0:52:04 > 0:52:16they?Friday the 27th of April. Thank you. We now come to the four

0:52:16 > 0:52:22motions on Universal Credit, children and young persons and

0:52:22 > 0:52:27social security, which will be debated together. I must inform the

0:52:27 > 0:52:32House that the speaker has certified the two motions on children and

0:52:32 > 0:52:38young persons as relating exclusively to England and within

0:52:38 > 0:52:46devolved legislative competence. The motions relating to those

0:52:46 > 0:52:52instruments are therefore subject to double majority voting, whole House

0:52:52 > 0:52:58and those representing constituencies in England. I should

0:52:58 > 0:53:04inform colleagues that this is a three-hour debate. It is very well

0:53:04 > 0:53:12subscribed. There are over 40 backbenchers wanting to speak. So I

0:53:12 > 0:53:17hope the bird frontbenchers and backbenchers will bear that in mind.

0:53:17 > 0:53:22I call Angela Rayner to move the first of the four motions.Thank

0:53:22 > 0:53:25you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Can I ask all members of the House to bear

0:53:25 > 0:53:28that in mind with their interventions as well and I would

0:53:28 > 0:53:33try and be as brief as I can. I beg to move the four motions in the name

0:53:33 > 0:53:37of the Leader of the Opposition, myself and my honourable friends. As

0:53:37 > 0:53:40my honourable friend the Shadow Chancellor said, this Tory

0:53:40 > 0:53:47government has created a crisis on a scale that we have not seen before.

0:53:47 > 0:53:52Today, they did nothing to tackle it. In these regulations, they seek

0:53:52 > 0:54:00to make it even worse. If the House does not vote for our motions today,

0:54:00 > 0:54:10over a million families will lose out. Firstly, they will lose their

0:54:10 > 0:54:15free school meals.Does the honourable lady gree with Channel

0:54:15 > 0:54:214's fact check, that says it is not the case that the government is

0:54:21 > 0:54:25taking free school meals from a million children? These are children

0:54:25 > 0:54:28who are not currently receiving free school meals and in fact, the

0:54:28 > 0:54:31government proposals would see 50,000 extra children receive free

0:54:31 > 0:54:37school meals? Perhaps the honourable lady could stop giving inaccurate

0:54:37 > 0:54:42information to the House.Well, the honourable member should know that

0:54:42 > 0:54:45his government have put in transitional arrangements and we

0:54:45 > 0:54:49would say that actually, under the transitional arrangements this

0:54:49 > 0:54:51government has introduced, those million children would be entitled

0:54:51 > 0:54:57and it is as a result of these regulations that they are pulling

0:54:57 > 0:55:07the rug from underneath those families that are hard-working. In

0:55:07 > 0:55:13my own boroughs of older man Tayside, a total of 8700 children

0:55:13 > 0:55:18growing up in poverty are set to miss out. In the Secretary of

0:55:18 > 0:55:25State's own area, the total is 6500. So much for that light at the end of

0:55:25 > 0:55:33the tunnel the Chancellor mentioned over the weekend.Is my honourable

0:55:33 > 0:55:37friend aware that the government has done an assessment on the impact on

0:55:37 > 0:55:42childhood obesity prior to taking this statutory assessment?The

0:55:42 > 0:55:46honourable member makes an important point, because childhood obesity is

0:55:46 > 0:55:52an important issue at the moment. The Children's Society found that

0:55:52 > 0:55:55there will be a million children growing up in poverty who will lose

0:55:55 > 0:56:03out from free school meals. They would have been entitled to that and

0:56:03 > 0:56:07incredibly, the government has the audacity to claim that they are

0:56:07 > 0:56:14being generous. They want to pretend that there will be no families who

0:56:14 > 0:56:18lose because the small numbers who benefit under Universal Credit will

0:56:18 > 0:56:28not lose out now.Isn't it right that money should be placed where it

0:56:28 > 0:56:38is most needed? And when Universal Credit is fully rolled out, 50,000

0:56:38 > 0:56:42more children will be getting free school meals, so it is not right to

0:56:42 > 0:56:48mislead about this issue.I am sure the honourable member doesn't

0:56:48 > 0:56:56believe that I am trying to mislead the House, but let me be clear. Many

0:56:56 > 0:57:03people including MPs wrongly believe that all children in poverty already

0:57:03 > 0:57:09get free school meals. That is not currently the case, but under the

0:57:09 > 0:57:13transitional protections under Universal Credit, there would be

0:57:13 > 0:57:18those million children who would be entitled to that benefit. It is

0:57:18 > 0:57:21through this secondary legislation that there are pulling the rug from

0:57:21 > 0:57:27underneath those families.Would my honourable friend not agree with me

0:57:27 > 0:57:35that this will make the working poor more poor and hurt families deeply?

0:57:35 > 0:57:39The honourable member made an excellent point, I am sure. I didn't

0:57:39 > 0:57:43quite get it!Would my honourable friend not agree with me that this

0:57:43 > 0:57:51will make the working poor even more poor in this day and age?

0:57:51 > 0:57:56Absolutely. The honourable member did make an important point. Those

0:57:56 > 0:58:00that currently get free school meals that were not part of the Universal

0:58:00 > 0:58:05Credit where households which were on out of work benefits. It is

0:58:05 > 0:58:09actually the ones that are in work that will be the most detrimental if

0:58:09 > 0:58:19this was to go through. The current system would help over a million

0:58:19 > 0:58:25more children than under the plans we would vote on today. The former

0:58:25 > 0:58:30Secretary of State for Work and Pensions once wrote that Universal

0:58:30 > 0:58:37Credit will ensure that work always pays and it seemed to pay, yet under

0:58:37 > 0:58:41these plans, Universal Credit will mean that work does not pay for

0:58:41 > 0:58:46hundreds of thousands of families. Those who are just above the

0:58:46 > 0:58:55threshold would be better off earning less.Could I just say that

0:58:55 > 0:58:57one of the biggest fundamental errors that the honourable lady and

0:58:57 > 0:59:00her party making is in the understanding of what transitional

0:59:00 > 0:59:13protection is about. I helped design this, so let me inform her.

0:59:13 > 0:59:18Perhaps they might like to listen and they might learn something.

0:59:18 > 0:59:24Transitional protection was designed to protect those moving from tax

0:59:24 > 0:59:30credits into Universal Credit so they did not, if it happens to be

0:59:30 > 0:59:33the case, lose any money in the transition. It was not about

0:59:33 > 0:59:37increasing to the degree she is talking about the number of those

0:59:37 > 0:59:41who receive free school meals. Under Universal Credit more will receive

0:59:41 > 0:59:51free school meals than would have been under their plan.Well, Madam

0:59:51 > 0:59:54Deputy Speaker, I think he acknowledges the fact that under the

0:59:54 > 0:59:57transitional protection is there are many more in work families that

0:59:57 > 1:00:02would have received free school meals that under these proposals,

1:00:02 > 1:00:06this secondary legislation they are bringing forward, that we are hoping

1:00:06 > 1:00:10members opposite will help those hard-working families by ensuring

1:00:10 > 1:00:14those passport benefits to apply to them, and that we help those just

1:00:14 > 1:00:17about managing out, which is what the Prime Minister claims she was

1:00:17 > 1:00:24going to do in the first place. I will give way.27% of children who

1:00:24 > 1:00:27live in Lincoln live in poverty. With the honourable lady agree with

1:00:27 > 1:00:30me that this cliff edge threshold might mean some of those children

1:00:30 > 1:00:38might not get a hot meal one day?I absolutely agree. Members opposite

1:00:38 > 1:00:42keep saying it is scaremongering. It is absolute fact that under the

1:00:42 > 1:00:45transitional agreements that currently applied, Lake in my

1:00:45 > 1:00:49constituency, one of the first to roll out Universal Credit, free

1:00:49 > 1:00:54school meals do apply to those applicants who receive Universal

1:00:54 > 1:00:59Credit, and that this regulation will remove that right for those

1:00:59 > 1:01:04individuals, and it is scandalous. I will give way.I thank my honourable

1:01:04 > 1:01:09friend for giving way. She is making an excellent opening statement. I

1:01:09 > 1:01:15think... Does she agree with me that the honourable gentleman opposite

1:01:15 > 1:01:19has almost helped make her point for her? Because he made clear this is

1:01:19 > 1:01:23about making sure people currently in receipt of benefits and free

1:01:23 > 1:01:29school meals would not be worse off when they transition, so in that

1:01:29 > 1:01:35case they are going to be worse off under these... He is making that

1:01:35 > 1:01:41case for power. All the hot and part opposite -- that case for her. We

1:01:41 > 1:01:47would have thought we would remember this is about children and families

1:01:47 > 1:01:51living in poverty in work and we should be doing our utmost to help

1:01:51 > 1:01:57them, not having a semantic argument -- all the huff and puff opposite.I

1:01:57 > 1:02:03absolutely agree, and don't just take our word for it. Look at what

1:02:03 > 1:02:06the Children's Society has said about those 1 million children who

1:02:06 > 1:02:11will not receive it if those regulations come into force.I am

1:02:11 > 1:02:14very grateful to my honourable friend and she is indeed making a

1:02:14 > 1:02:21very persuasive case. In the Bradford district, over 10,000

1:02:21 > 1:02:24children living in poverty will miss out on free school meals. Northern

1:02:24 > 1:02:31Ireland will be exempt from the same. Is it not the case that they

1:02:31 > 1:02:36are putting political benefit over child poverty?Well, my honourable

1:02:36 > 1:02:39friend makes an excellent point which I will come onto later in my

1:02:39 > 1:02:45contribution. As I said, those just above... You have had your chance,

1:02:45 > 1:02:49thank you. Those that are just above the threshold would be better off

1:02:49 > 1:02:54earning less. Honourable members have been told there are over 40

1:02:54 > 1:02:58people waiting to get into this debate. I am trying to give way the

1:02:58 > 1:03:01best I can. The honourable member has already intervened once and I

1:03:01 > 1:03:08think that is more than enough.One too many!Those just above the

1:03:08 > 1:03:12threshold would be better off earning less under these proposals.

1:03:12 > 1:03:16The Government is pulling the rug from under their feet, because once

1:03:16 > 1:03:22the error above £7,400 they will be around £400 a year worse off for

1:03:22 > 1:03:27each child they have in school -- once they are earning above £7,400.

1:03:27 > 1:03:32When did the Government abandon the principle that work should pay?

1:03:32 > 1:03:37Perhaps the Secretary of State can tell us why she will be voting for

1:03:37 > 1:03:41policy, as my honourable friend has just said, twice as generous in

1:03:41 > 1:03:48Northern Ireland as it will be for own constituents'sI thank my

1:03:48 > 1:03:51honourable friend for giving way. Would she agree with me that the

1:03:51 > 1:03:55party opposite when it talks about making work pay, they completely

1:03:55 > 1:04:00demolish that with the Universal Credit by George Osborne removing...

1:04:00 > 1:04:08And now work doesn't pay?I think the member makes a really important

1:04:08 > 1:04:14point. Universal Credit has had add-ons and add-ons ever since the

1:04:14 > 1:04:17Government proposed it which has made it very complex and in some

1:04:17 > 1:04:22cases, as I have just out later, work doesn't pay for those in

1:04:22 > 1:04:27receipt if these proposals are put forward. Madam Deputy Speaker, I

1:04:27 > 1:04:31would like to make just a little bit more progress. I would like to

1:04:31 > 1:04:34address the issue of free childcare. Once again the Government has a

1:04:34 > 1:04:38policy in transition, one they are seeking to restrict. In fact there

1:04:38 > 1:04:49are around 200 two-year-olds currently eligible for 15 hours of

1:04:49 > 1:04:55free childcare -- 200,000. But there are over 400,000 in families

1:04:55 > 1:04:58receiving free credit. Ministers have refused to say how many

1:04:58 > 1:05:03children will be eligible under their policy. Can they finally do so

1:05:03 > 1:05:06now? There are hundreds of thousands of children who may lose out under

1:05:06 > 1:05:13their plans. Once again, some of the most vulnerable children are the

1:05:13 > 1:05:19first in line for Government cuts. I will happily give way.In this House

1:05:19 > 1:05:23we all believed in an honest and balanced debate. Can we just hear

1:05:23 > 1:05:27from the honourable lady that it is clear that 50,000 more children will

1:05:27 > 1:05:33be entitled to free school meals under Universal Credit than

1:05:33 > 1:05:38previously, and 700,000 more children will be entitled to the --

1:05:38 > 1:05:437000 children will be entitled to their two-year-old offer.That

1:05:43 > 1:05:46figures from their own consultation document but there is no

1:05:46 > 1:05:49accompanying methodology, so I am not quite as convinced, and it makes

1:05:49 > 1:05:54up less than 5% of those in poverty. Actually, what we are talking about

1:05:54 > 1:05:57and what the regulations are would mean that those that would currently

1:05:57 > 1:06:05be eligible under that support that was laid out for Universal Credit,

1:06:05 > 1:06:09they would have that rug pulled from under them. You can keep making

1:06:09 > 1:06:17faces but those are the facts. Once again, Madam Deputy Speaker, this

1:06:17 > 1:06:21create a cliff edge for families in receipt of their childcare. One that

1:06:21 > 1:06:26was pleased the income of working families who are already struggling

1:06:26 > 1:06:32to get by. Under Universal Credit, they have to pay their childcare

1:06:32 > 1:06:36costs upfront, and then claim that money back. With childcare costs

1:06:36 > 1:06:43rising faster than wages meeting these upfront costs will make it

1:06:43 > 1:06:46impossible for many working families to make ends meet. Yet another

1:06:46 > 1:06:55barrier put in their way. Only months ago several members of the

1:06:55 > 1:06:59benches opposite asked the Chancellor to look again at the

1:06:59 > 1:07:03rate, because it meant work would not pay for low income families.

1:07:03 > 1:07:08Today's vote, Madame Deputy Speaker, is on exactly this issue. When the

1:07:08 > 1:07:12Government has already made those families bear the brunt of their

1:07:12 > 1:07:25cuts, to add yet another burden is just wrong. To go?Very good. --

1:07:25 > 1:07:29them. I thank the honourable lady for giving way, she has been

1:07:29 > 1:07:32extremely generous with the tempest of the Labour Party manifesto

1:07:32 > 1:07:36committed to extend free school meals to all primary school pupils.

1:07:36 > 1:07:41This is an additional extension to a lot more children in secondary

1:07:41 > 1:07:44school. Would she please tell us how much that would cost and how her

1:07:44 > 1:07:52party would fund it where they empower?-- were they in power. The

1:07:52 > 1:07:57member knows the school plan report published in July 2013 actually

1:07:57 > 1:08:01recommended the Government look at infant and Junior schools for free

1:08:01 > 1:08:05school meals. The Labour Party manifesto was clearly just extending

1:08:05 > 1:08:09that. It was unfortunate this Government chose not to do that, and

1:08:09 > 1:08:12they cut that and just give it to the infants. If members opposite

1:08:12 > 1:08:16would like to see our manifesto and the costing I am sure I can provide

1:08:16 > 1:08:20it, because there were a lot more costings in our manifesto than there

1:08:20 > 1:08:29were in the members' opposite. Madame Deputy Speaker...Order, can

1:08:29 > 1:08:34I just say I think this is an extremely important debate? It is a

1:08:34 > 1:08:37very serious debate. The honourable lady has taken a lot of

1:08:37 > 1:08:40interventions. But when she has taken interventions there is no

1:08:40 > 1:08:44point in just shouting at her. It is important to listen to the answer

1:08:44 > 1:08:49and that will go the same when the minister is speaking.Thank you,

1:08:49 > 1:08:53Madame Deputy Speaker. I will now address the other issue on

1:08:53 > 1:08:56childcare. The Government are phasing out voters as they

1:08:56 > 1:09:02transition to a policy of tax free childcare. -- they are phasing out

1:09:02 > 1:09:06vouchers. This policy is not working. Tax free childcare has been

1:09:06 > 1:09:11so shambolic that they fell 90% short of their take-up target, and

1:09:11 > 1:09:18spending was less than 5% of their projection. Instead, nearly £1

1:09:18 > 1:09:22billion earmarked for childcare was returned to the Treasury. Yet they

1:09:22 > 1:09:27are still pushing ahead with a plan to phase out childcare vouchers, a

1:09:27 > 1:09:33plan that will leave families hundreds of pounds worse off. This

1:09:33 > 1:09:37will direct the transfer Government support to those who are better off.

1:09:37 > 1:09:41I will give way.I am very grateful to the honourable lady. She may have

1:09:41 > 1:09:46received the same and I did from the Government showing 10,000 of their

1:09:46 > 1:09:50own officials still use childcare vouchers. And the same number signed

1:09:50 > 1:09:53up to the scheme. Does she agree that if ministers won't protect

1:09:53 > 1:10:00their own officials they should at least stand up for our Armed Forces?

1:10:00 > 1:10:04I absolutely agree. Armed Forces do a magnificent job for us and it is

1:10:04 > 1:10:07an absolute scandal they will also be worse off as a result of these

1:10:07 > 1:10:13measures. Members across the House will know hundreds of their

1:10:13 > 1:10:16constituents have written letters and signed petitions expressing

1:10:16 > 1:10:20concerns about these policy changes, yet the Government are continuing to

1:10:20 > 1:10:24push ahead with them and have tried to do so by the stroke of a

1:10:24 > 1:10:29ministerial pen. The only legislation that has come to this

1:10:29 > 1:10:33House is that before us today, which completes the phase-out of those who

1:10:33 > 1:10:38change employers from after April. We have called a boat on the

1:10:38 > 1:10:44regulations, but we want to make clear that if the House passes our

1:10:44 > 1:10:48motion today -- we have called a vote. Then we are sending a clear

1:10:48 > 1:10:53message to the Government that it is time to think again and keep

1:10:53 > 1:10:57childcare vouchers open. Finally, Madame Deputy Speaker, on Universal

1:10:57 > 1:11:01Credit, these regulations apply new

1:11:01 > 1:11:04sanctions to those currently protected, and cut the time period

1:11:04 > 1:11:13claimants have to provide evidence. It will be those who suffer, those

1:11:13 > 1:11:18with mental health needs. Charities have charged the Government to

1:11:18 > 1:11:22reconsider, saying it will make the system harder to regulate at a time

1:11:22 > 1:11:28when people are unwell and most in need of support. Why is she ignoring

1:11:28 > 1:11:33those voices and making the system even harder for the very people who

1:11:33 > 1:11:40they claim they want to support? I want to move briefly on the

1:11:40 > 1:11:46provisions relating to self employed people, the absolute bedrock of our

1:11:46 > 1:11:51economy. The Chancellor spoke of start-ups and new businesses in his

1:11:51 > 1:11:56speech earlier today but this makes it harder for self-employed people.

1:11:56 > 1:12:00The TUC warns a short start-up period in the minimum income for

1:12:00 > 1:12:04could close businesses with the potential to become sustainable and

1:12:04 > 1:12:08profitable. These rules could discourage people from

1:12:08 > 1:12:14self-employment entirely. Again, why is the minister making things so

1:12:14 > 1:12:18much harder for people her Government claims to support? We

1:12:18 > 1:12:22know that the self-employed are more likely to be on lower earnings

1:12:22 > 1:12:27compared to employees, yet the Office for Budget Responsibility, in

1:12:27 > 1:12:33its recent welfare report, confirms the low paid self-employed face a

1:12:33 > 1:12:37much tougher benefits system under Universal Credit. On average, Madam

1:12:37 > 1:12:42Deputy Speaker, those should expect to lose around £3000. The savings

1:12:42 > 1:12:47seem to be coming from the pockets of the low paid self-employed. Why

1:12:47 > 1:12:54is the Minister pursuing a policy that will make so many self-employed

1:12:54 > 1:13:00people so much worse off? These regulations make the Universal

1:13:00 > 1:13:05Credit system even more complicated with the introduction of surplus

1:13:05 > 1:13:12earnings rule. With Universal Credit based on previous month income, a

1:13:12 > 1:13:18self employed claimant could get substantially less than an employed

1:13:18 > 1:13:24claimant with a similar income. Work and Pensions Secretary 's have said

1:13:24 > 1:13:27it will be simpler and make work pay, but once again they are

1:13:27 > 1:13:33proposing the opposite. Madam Deputy Speaker, all of these statutory

1:13:33 > 1:13:38instruments share a common theme. They are about support we offer the

1:13:38 > 1:13:41families and their children, particularly those already

1:13:41 > 1:13:45struggling to get by. I remember when the Prime Minister said the

1:13:45 > 1:13:59mission of her Government was this, but I am thinking it stood for Just

1:13:59 > 1:14:02About May's

1:14:02 > 1:14:07but I am thinking it stood for Just About May's, survival. But there

1:14:07 > 1:14:11will be JAMS today and tomorrow, because instead of helping them get

1:14:11 > 1:14:16on and get by, this Government is making life even harder. Today is a

1:14:16 > 1:14:20chance to say, enough is enough. Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the

1:14:20 > 1:14:25motions to this House.

1:14:26 > 1:14:30The question is as on the order paper. Secretary of State Esther

1:14:30 > 1:14:37McVey.Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. As she is on the front

1:14:37 > 1:14:40bench today, I congratulate the honourable lady for Wirral West on

1:14:40 > 1:14:45her promotion. I'm sure she would have liked to have got it in happier

1:14:45 > 1:14:49circumstances, but nonetheless, I welcome her to her role and I hope

1:14:49 > 1:14:51she too doesn't fall victim to the bullying culture of the leader's

1:14:51 > 1:14:57office that her friend and honourable lady the member for

1:14:57 > 1:15:03Oldham East and Saddleworth has. Well, well, well, what a strange and

1:15:03 > 1:15:07topsy-turvy world we find ourselves in. Measures so strongly fought for

1:15:07 > 1:15:13and won by claimants, MPs, stakeholders and charities only

1:15:13 > 1:15:19months ago now being opposed by the opposition. These are changes that

1:15:19 > 1:15:24were proposed by the most vocal defenders of benefits now being

1:15:24 > 1:15:31obstructed. In the chamber today, we shouldn't be giving the public

1:15:31 > 1:15:36misinformation, but unfortunately, that is what has been happening.

1:15:36 > 1:15:39Last month, stories emerged from members opposite, particularly the

1:15:39 > 1:15:45member for Ashton-under-Lyne and repeated today that our plans for

1:15:45 > 1:15:49entitlement to free school meals would deprive over 1 million

1:15:49 > 1:15:55children. It took a Channel 4 News fact check to point out that no

1:15:55 > 1:15:58child currently receiving meals would lose out their entitlement,

1:15:58 > 1:16:06and that in fact, 50,000 more children would benefit under our

1:16:06 > 1:16:11proposals when compared to the previous system. While I understand

1:16:11 > 1:16:15that that is the nature of the

1:16:15 > 1:16:16opposition, to oppose, scaremongering and misinformation

1:16:16 > 1:16:22from that side of the House have surely reached a new low as today,

1:16:22 > 1:16:26they seek to an old regulations consisting largely of changes

1:16:26 > 1:16:31introduced purely to support benefit claimants, changes that the members

1:16:31 > 1:16:39opposite have called for, and all this after a recent intervention by

1:16:39 > 1:16:42the UK Statistics Authority make it clear that claims made by the

1:16:42 > 1:16:48members opposite about Universal Credit causing poverty, debt and

1:16:48 > 1:16:58eviction were not supported by evidence. Of course, the scale and

1:16:58 > 1:17:03nature of the change represented by Universal Credit means scrutiny is

1:17:03 > 1:17:10inevitable and it is important, and I welcome that. But unsubstantiated

1:17:10 > 1:17:12and exaggerated claims about widespread problems caused by

1:17:12 > 1:17:16Universal Credit amount to nothing less than scaremongering. They cause

1:17:16 > 1:17:21claimants alarm and in the worst cases, stop them getting the money

1:17:21 > 1:17:26they are entitled to. And yet where we find ourselves today, once again

1:17:26 > 1:17:32debating Universal Credit, with the same false alarms from the Shadow

1:17:32 > 1:17:35Cabinet, only this time, we are debating the very regulations that

1:17:35 > 1:17:39have designed to address the legitimate concerns of the members

1:17:39 > 1:17:50opposite and our stakeholders.The Secretary of State said that claims

1:17:50 > 1:17:54should not be made when they are unsubstantiated. I have been asking

1:17:54 > 1:17:58questions regarding the 50,000 increase figure that is in the

1:17:58 > 1:18:01consultation response. I have received no facts whatsoever about

1:18:01 > 1:18:10how that has been arrived at. Will that be published, please?The

1:18:10 > 1:18:18numbers have been calculated by civil servants who have been

1:18:18 > 1:18:23modelling the numbers. Those are the facts from independent people, facts

1:18:23 > 1:18:29that can be relied upon, rather than people who are making it up, as we

1:18:29 > 1:18:35have heard today, as they go along. Will my honourable friend dispel

1:18:35 > 1:18:39some of the myths being put out by members of the party opposite in

1:18:39 > 1:18:42scaremongering that is going on and reassure my constituents where we

1:18:42 > 1:18:46have full roll-out of Universal Credit that those already in receipt

1:18:46 > 1:18:52of free school meals will not lose that eligibility?My honourable

1:18:52 > 1:18:59friend is correct. Thank you for adding that comment, which is right.

1:18:59 > 1:19:04That is the protection that is afforded as well as going forward,

1:19:04 > 1:19:15more people will be benefiting from it. While not just debating these

1:19:15 > 1:19:22points today, but we are saving the extra support that we brought in

1:19:22 > 1:19:27from the opposition, who would be happy to destroy the extra support

1:19:27 > 1:19:32that we brought in for benefit claimants. Perhaps I should remind

1:19:32 > 1:19:37the House that some of the changes in these regulations are what

1:19:37 > 1:19:41benefits they will bring to claimants. After all, the policy

1:19:41 > 1:19:44underpinning these regulations have been widely debated and supported

1:19:44 > 1:19:49inside and out of the chamber. The regulations abolishing waiting days,

1:19:49 > 1:19:53which will help many claimants on average by £160 and at the same time

1:19:53 > 1:19:58reduce the time to take to receive the first monthly payment. These

1:19:58 > 1:20:02regulations bring into effect the housing benefit transitional

1:20:02 > 1:20:05payment, which amounts to two weeks of housing benefit at the start of

1:20:05 > 1:20:10the claim. This is worth an average £233 towards helping claimants they

1:20:10 > 1:20:14on top of their housing costs as they move into Universal Credit and

1:20:14 > 1:20:22these regulations also increased the work allowances in further support

1:20:22 > 1:20:30for those who are striving to enter work.The Secretary of State is

1:20:30 > 1:20:33attempting to provide a stout defence of the impact of Universal

1:20:33 > 1:20:38Credit. Why is it, then, that her colleagues in Stirling Council

1:20:38 > 1:20:41proposed three years of litigation against the impact of Universal

1:20:41 > 1:20:48Credit, worth over half £1 million, only last month?Actually, if you

1:20:48 > 1:20:51look at what this government brought in at the Budget, it was £1.5

1:20:51 > 1:20:58billion of support for the country. And where are supporting people as

1:20:58 > 1:21:05best we can. Additionally, these regulations fund temporary

1:21:05 > 1:21:10accommodation through housing benefit, which has been widely

1:21:10 > 1:21:13called for and unanimously welcomed by local authority. These

1:21:13 > 1:21:17regulations follow on my host of other changes we have already

1:21:17 > 1:21:22implemented. These include making our telephone lines Freephone

1:21:22 > 1:21:25numbers, extending the maximum repayment for advances from six

1:21:25 > 1:21:32months to a year, increasing the maximum advance that claimants can

1:21:32 > 1:21:36receive to up to 100%, changing the guidance to ensure that when private

1:21:36 > 1:21:39sector housing claimants come onto Universal Credit, we know whether

1:21:39 > 1:21:43their rent was previously paid directly to the landlord and we can

1:21:43 > 1:21:54ensure that continues.Mina even than the master in Oliver Twist's

1:21:54 > 1:21:58workhouse, the Secretary of State seeks not just to stop the second

1:21:58 > 1:22:04helpings, but any meal at all. Come to Norfolk. If these changes go

1:22:04 > 1:22:07through, 12,500 children will be denied a hot midday meal. How does

1:22:07 > 1:22:21that square the circle with making work pay?Fortunately, I was taught

1:22:21 > 1:22:24this as a child. When you have totally lost the argument, you make

1:22:24 > 1:22:31up the facts, and this is what we are hearing from the opposition.

1:22:31 > 1:22:36When you have just brought in all of the requests that the opposition

1:22:36 > 1:22:41wanted, the list that I have just reiterated supporting more people

1:22:41 > 1:22:47into work, the opposition are just scaremongering, making things up as

1:22:47 > 1:22:53they go along. So I hope it is clear to the whole House what real and

1:22:53 > 1:22:59tangible benefit these regulations will bring for claimants and that is

1:22:59 > 1:23:03promised, we are making the changes necessary to continue to deliver

1:23:03 > 1:23:07Universal Credit safely and securely with all the necessary support the

1:23:07 > 1:23:12claimants need. But I want to be clearer about another thing, because

1:23:12 > 1:23:18I know members have stood up for it during the Universal Credit debates,

1:23:18 > 1:23:25and that is to recount stories of cases where their constituents have

1:23:25 > 1:23:29reported difficulties with Universal Credit. Where they have, we have

1:23:29 > 1:23:33immediately sought to address those concerns to get it right. It is

1:23:33 > 1:23:43vital to all of us that we get this right so that we can deliver the

1:23:43 > 1:23:50most modern, forward-thinking, flexible benefit in the world. That

1:23:50 > 1:23:55is what this government is seeking to deliver. This benefit will be at

1:23:55 > 1:24:08the cutting edge of support throughout the world.On problems

1:24:08 > 1:24:10with Universal Credit, the Secretary of State will recognise that

1:24:10 > 1:24:15families earning a bit less than 7400 a year, the last thing they

1:24:15 > 1:24:19will want is a pay rise, because if they get it, they will immediately

1:24:19 > 1:24:24lose their free school meals and be much worse off. That is a serious

1:24:24 > 1:24:28problem for working families, which used to be a big priority for her

1:24:28 > 1:24:35department. Will she recognised that?The honourable member raises a

1:24:35 > 1:24:395-point, whereas the other points we have heard have been fabrication --

1:24:39 > 1:24:45it is a fair point. In this instance, when we talk about earning

1:24:45 > 1:24:487400, actually, with Universal Credit, we talk about people who

1:24:48 > 1:24:53will be bringing home somewhere between 18,000 to 20 4000. And you

1:24:53 > 1:25:06are quite right. If I could finish this pertinent point, as this is now

1:25:06 > 1:25:10a personalised benefit where people will be having their own work code,

1:25:10 > 1:25:18we would not seek to put somebody in a less advantageous situation. So

1:25:18 > 1:25:21when you look at the money that is coming in and the extra support from

1:25:21 > 1:25:27school meals, you would not seek to do that to an individual. So it

1:25:27 > 1:25:32would be with a work coach working with an individual to help them to

1:25:32 > 1:25:40progress in work so that they are in a better situation.On the question

1:25:40 > 1:25:42of work incentives, can the Secretary of State confirm that

1:25:42 > 1:25:49there have been two studies, one in December 2015 and another in

1:25:49 > 1:25:53September 2017, both of which showed that people on Universal Credit were

1:25:53 > 1:25:57more likely to get back into work and those people on the predecessor

1:25:57 > 1:26:03benefit? So this is helping people get back into work.My honourable

1:26:03 > 1:26:10friend is quite correct. There are also further studies that show that

1:26:10 > 1:26:17people on Universal Credit are much more likely to look for work than

1:26:17 > 1:26:24people on job-seeker's allowance. 86% look for work and that is

1:26:24 > 1:26:29because underneath the legacy benefits, there were things like the

1:26:29 > 1:26:3216 hour rule, which trapped people on benefits, which will not happen

1:26:32 > 1:26:40under Universal Credit because every hour that you work, it pays to work.

1:26:40 > 1:26:47My honourable friend is making a fantastic task of doing this right.

1:26:47 > 1:26:50Alongside the absurdities she has already pointed out over the

1:26:50 > 1:26:53opposition's position where they will now vote against the changes

1:26:53 > 1:26:59that will benefit those who need them most, they are now voting for a

1:26:59 > 1:27:03policy that will deliver free school meals to somebody earning £40,000 a

1:27:03 > 1:27:14year. Doesn't she think, therefore the few, not the many?My right

1:27:14 > 1:27:20honourable friend makes a good point. Maybe it is honest mistakes

1:27:20 > 1:27:25from the opposite benches, I'm not sure. But under Universal Credit,

1:27:25 > 1:27:31people can be in work and not in work. Maybe they have not understood

1:27:31 > 1:27:37the complexities of the system, that we are helping people in work. As my

1:27:37 > 1:27:40right honourable friend says, should you be less allowing everybody on

1:27:40 > 1:27:44Universal Credit to have free school meals, parents could be on £40,000 a

1:27:44 > 1:27:53year. And we support people on free school meals who are either not in

1:27:53 > 1:27:59work or in a low amount of work. Order. Can we listen to the

1:27:59 > 1:28:06Secretary of State? If she takes interventions, that is fine. We

1:28:06 > 1:28:14should be a bit calmer.Thank you. I would give way to my honourable

1:28:14 > 1:28:20friend.Jobcentres in my constituency tell me with some

1:28:20 > 1:28:23passion that Universal Credit is helping them get more people into

1:28:23 > 1:28:31work. But the government has also listened to concerns about Universal

1:28:31 > 1:28:33Credit and is making improvements. Is it not bizarre that the party

1:28:33 > 1:28:37opposite is trying to block those improvements when the government is

1:28:37 > 1:28:47doing the right thing?My right honourable friend is not only spot

1:28:47 > 1:28:53on, but the incredulity with which she says what the opposition are

1:28:53 > 1:28:56stopping only points out how ridiculous the position is of the

1:28:56 > 1:29:03opposition. We have not only helped an extra 3.1 million more people

1:29:03 > 1:29:05into work, these regulations that we are seeking to bring in help the

1:29:05 > 1:29:10most vulnerable and are bringing in an extra £1.5 billion worth of

1:29:10 > 1:29:20support.

1:29:20 > 1:29:26Looking at the education regulations and free school meals, the

1:29:26 > 1:29:30government has recently published its response is to consultations of

1:29:30 > 1:29:35the earnings pressure to receive this under Universal Credit. The

1:29:35 > 1:29:36scope of these consultations includes entitlement to free school

1:29:36 > 1:29:41meals, the early years pupil premium and free early education provision

1:29:41 > 1:29:44for two-year-olds. The intentions of these regulations is to replace the

1:29:44 > 1:29:51transitional criteria introduced in 2013. These transitional measures

1:29:51 > 1:29:55made all families on Universal Credit eligible for these

1:29:55 > 1:29:57entitlements, a move that was necessary so that no household

1:29:57 > 1:30:03should lose out in the early stages of the Universal Credit roll-out.

1:30:03 > 1:30:08Having considered all responses to the consultation, the Department for

1:30:08 > 1:30:11Education laid regulations on the 7th of February to replace the

1:30:11 > 1:30:16temporary criteria with the new earnings threshold. And this is what

1:30:16 > 1:30:25much of the debate has so far centred upon. Hopefully, we have

1:30:25 > 1:30:34drawn clarity. Hopefully, the opposition benches will understand

1:30:34 > 1:30:37why we are being helpful to their constituents by allowing these

1:30:37 > 1:30:42regulations to come through.In preparing this change to benefits

1:30:42 > 1:30:49that shows how un-trusted the government is on benefits, if you

1:30:49 > 1:30:56are trying to sell something, you can't. But my question is this. If

1:30:56 > 1:31:03the system is so fantastic, why do 80% of people who come and see MPs

1:31:03 > 1:31:06get their benefits? Why shouldn't the system just work? Why does it

1:31:06 > 1:31:15take 80% of appeals?Order. These have to be short interventions. I

1:31:15 > 1:31:27want to make sure all members get in.Thank you. It would be helpful

1:31:27 > 1:31:31if we didn't just make up statistics and facts as we go along, as we have

1:31:31 > 1:31:42just heard, and listen to the support we are providing to

1:31:42 > 1:31:50claimants. As I said, it is a topsy-turvy world. This noise, this

1:31:50 > 1:31:56ding-dong was when they were calling for these changes. Now we are

1:31:56 > 1:32:00introducing these changes, IR back to a ding-dong and not wanting them.

1:32:00 > 1:32:07But never mind. Turning now to the regulations concerning national

1:32:07 > 1:32:11insurance contributions and childcare. These regulations align

1:32:11 > 1:32:14the tax and national insurance treatments of employer supported

1:32:14 > 1:32:19childcare where parents opt into the new tax-free card scheme. They

1:32:19 > 1:32:22remove the national insurance disregard to new entrants into the

1:32:22 > 1:32:25scheme once the relevant day has been set. They are vital to ensure

1:32:25 > 1:32:31that the tax system operates fairly and the government can target its

1:32:31 > 1:32:35childcare support effectively. For many parents, being able to afford

1:32:35 > 1:32:38good quality childcare is essential for them to work and support their

1:32:38 > 1:32:41families. That is why we are replacing the childcare vouchers

1:32:41 > 1:32:48with tax-free childcare, which is a fairer system. Tax-free childcare is

1:32:48 > 1:32:52now open to all eligible parents. They can get up to 2000 per child

1:32:52 > 1:32:56per year to help towards their childcare costs. More families will

1:32:56 > 1:33:00be able to access support through tax-free childcare, because only

1:33:00 > 1:33:08about half of employed working parents can access vouchers.

1:33:08 > 1:33:12Self-employed parents were excluded from vouchers. Now 1.5 million

1:33:12 > 1:33:16families are eligible for tax-free childcare compared to around 600,000

1:33:16 > 1:33:26families currently benefiting from the vouchers.Can the honourable

1:33:26 > 1:33:29lady clarify something she said in relation to people getting paid

1:33:29 > 1:33:35increases which then perversely lead to them being worse off? The

1:33:35 > 1:33:39Secretary of State said she would instruct personal trainers, it

1:33:39 > 1:33:41appears, to put that right financially. I can hear a shudder

1:33:41 > 1:33:45going around benefits offices up and down the country at the idea that

1:33:45 > 1:33:49the Secretary of State has said any constituent of ours that faces being

1:33:49 > 1:33:55worse off as a consequence of a pay rise, the Secretary of State's

1:33:55 > 1:34:03personal trainers will compensate those individuals?Thank you for

1:34:03 > 1:34:06that intervention, because it allows me to explain how Universal Credit

1:34:06 > 1:34:11works, which is on a tailor-made basis so that the claimant will

1:34:11 > 1:34:16always be in contact with their work coaches, working out what is better,

1:34:16 > 1:34:21how progression would be better and why they would be taking a

1:34:21 > 1:34:25reasonable job because it makes them better off. This is not something I

1:34:25 > 1:34:31am unilaterally saying. I would like to say to the opposite bench, please

1:34:31 > 1:34:39go to your local job centre. Please meet with your work coaches, who can

1:34:39 > 1:34:47then explained how the system works. The government introduced the

1:34:47 > 1:34:50announcement of tax-free childcare in 2013 as a successor to childcare

1:34:50 > 1:34:56vouchers. The passing of the childcare act in 2014, which

1:34:56 > 1:35:01legislated for tax-free childcare, had cross-party support. Tax-free

1:35:01 > 1:35:04childcare is now fully rolled out and the date for the closure of the

1:35:04 > 1:35:09voucher scheme to new entrants is April this year. It was set out in

1:35:09 > 1:35:14the 2016 giving two years notice. Those parents receiving childcare

1:35:14 > 1:35:19vouchers can now continue to use them, while their current employer

1:35:19 > 1:35:26continues to offer the scheme.Isn't the bottom line here that under the

1:35:26 > 1:35:31previous tax credit system, people got 75% towards their childcare

1:35:31 > 1:35:37costs, but under Universal Credit, they get 80% towards childcare costs

1:35:37 > 1:35:43and they can work all the hours that they want?Universal Credit is far

1:35:43 > 1:35:49more generous, as my honourable friend points out. Up to 85% of

1:35:49 > 1:35:56childcare costs will be given to people who need them. Under the

1:35:56 > 1:36:03childcare voucher scheme, the estimated cost of forgoing the

1:36:03 > 1:36:08national insurance contributions is £220 million per year. This is paid

1:36:08 > 1:36:11to employers and voucher providers to administer the schemes. It is not

1:36:11 > 1:36:14surprising that voucher providers are lobbying to keep the scheme

1:36:14 > 1:36:20open. However, we are focused on delivering a better childcare offer

1:36:20 > 1:36:26for working families. Tax-free childcare is more simple to

1:36:26 > 1:36:30administer for childcare providers, who will not have to deal with

1:36:30 > 1:36:40multiple child voucher providers. These regulations will bring the

1:36:40 > 1:36:43national insurance contributions relief in line with the income tax

1:36:43 > 1:36:46treatment. They are an essential step in reforming government

1:36:46 > 1:36:50childcare support to provide a fair and well targeted system. Closing

1:36:50 > 1:36:54the childcare voucher scheme to new entrants will ensure that more

1:36:54 > 1:36:57government support goes to parents and helps working families to reduce

1:36:57 > 1:37:05their childcare costs.With the consultation that the government is

1:37:05 > 1:37:09carrying out into abuse of women, does the minister recognised the

1:37:09 > 1:37:13threat to women of the single payment of financial control and

1:37:13 > 1:37:18abuse, and with the minister be willing to consider making

1:37:18 > 1:37:23individual payments of the child tax credits to the mother et the norm?

1:37:23 > 1:37:28Charities have shown that women who are being abused will not apply for

1:37:28 > 1:37:34exception because they feel they will come under physical abuse.The

1:37:34 > 1:37:39honourable lady makes a good point. That is why it is possible to split

1:37:39 > 1:37:47payments according to need. I would also say that Scotland, as a

1:37:47 > 1:37:52devolved administration, has the right to alter these roles, should

1:37:52 > 1:37:58they wish to, and provide extra support. But you can now split

1:37:58 > 1:38:03payments and we have listened to those concerns. We are also

1:38:03 > 1:38:06listening to colleagues in Northern Ireland who have raced specific

1:38:06 > 1:38:10circumstances relating to certain public sector service employers and

1:38:10 > 1:38:13relating to engagement with those colleagues to look at those issues

1:38:13 > 1:38:17as tax-free childcare continues to roll out to replace employer

1:38:17 > 1:38:21supported childcare. We have seen the success of 30 hours of free

1:38:21 > 1:38:24childcare for three and four-year-olds in England, so we are

1:38:24 > 1:38:28committed to working with the Northern Ireland parties to

1:38:28 > 1:38:31administer childcare support of this kind in Northern Ireland in absence

1:38:31 > 1:38:35of an executive. For the reasons I have set out, and mulling these

1:38:35 > 1:38:40regulations would deprive families and their children of important and

1:38:40 > 1:38:48positive support that this government is determined to offer.

1:38:48 > 1:38:52And knowing these regulations would therefore have a range of very

1:38:52 > 1:39:03negative effects -- cancelling these.I am grateful for the

1:39:03 > 1:39:13opportunity to speak on these motions. The other two motions

1:39:13 > 1:39:18relate to England or England and Wales only, but regarding this one

1:39:18 > 1:39:23on Universal Credit, it covers most of what was announced during the

1:39:23 > 1:39:27Chancellor's autumn budget, after months of negative headlines, their

1:39:27 > 1:39:31big sell to their concerned backbenchers, which was not really

1:39:31 > 1:39:35very much. For instance, they reduce the waiting time for Universal

1:39:35 > 1:39:40Credit to be paid from six weeks to five, welcome, but a very wee step.

1:39:40 > 1:39:45There were also more controversial measures, such as changes to the

1:39:45 > 1:39:55rules on surplus earnings and removing this blooming

1:39:55 > 1:39:59specifications on illness for those phone fit for work. Reducing the

1:39:59 > 1:40:02number of dates people have to register regarding a change in their

1:40:02 > 1:40:07circumstance, from one month to 14 days. Mr Deputy Speaker, the

1:40:07 > 1:40:12Government's tweaks to the welfare system over the last years like a

1:40:12 > 1:40:19drip, drip of cuts or slowly the value and support -- value of

1:40:19 > 1:40:22support provided. For people on low incomes, to cope not only with the

1:40:22 > 1:40:27fact that the benefits are frozen, meeting the costs of living, but

1:40:27 > 1:40:29also the Government continue to add layers of punitive bureaucracy

1:40:29 > 1:40:37designed to trip them up. An individual financial sanction, it is

1:40:37 > 1:40:43of tiny value overall, but it is proportionally an enormous chunk of

1:40:43 > 1:40:47that person's income. Yet this Government seem content to make

1:40:47 > 1:40:51these changes off-the-cuff in the same way they treat the Universal

1:40:51 > 1:40:57Credit, the same way they tried to tweak PIP to stop and go with severe

1:40:57 > 1:41:01mental health problems receiving a higher rate. It is appalling. I

1:41:01 > 1:41:05received an official warning that Universal Credit is to be rolled out

1:41:05 > 1:41:09in my constituency. I have been working closely with my local

1:41:09 > 1:41:13citizens advice bureau to make sure they are joined up in responding to

1:41:13 > 1:41:19the issues as they unfold, as they have in many other members'

1:41:19 > 1:41:24constituencies across this house. I am worried for local employees and

1:41:24 > 1:41:27their employers as to how Universal Credit will impact on them, as the

1:41:27 > 1:41:31picture elsewhere has been disastrous. The continued roll-out

1:41:31 > 1:41:36of Universal Credit is having a devastating impact on credit, on

1:41:36 > 1:41:39claimants, with debt and rent arrears through the riffs. I will

1:41:39 > 1:41:44give way.He is speaking about the roll-out. We had the roll-out just a

1:41:44 > 1:41:49few month ago. Can I assure him that roll-out is going, not in my words

1:41:49 > 1:41:53but in those of the manager of the job centre who has worked their for

1:41:53 > 1:41:5730 years, an independent person working day in, day out to help

1:41:57 > 1:42:00people, it is much better than any previous system? Maybe he would like

1:42:00 > 1:42:07to visit and speak to her in Redditch?I have no reason to doubt

1:42:07 > 1:42:11what the honourable member has to say, except for the experiences that

1:42:11 > 1:42:14happened to be considered by honourable member across this side

1:42:14 > 1:42:18of the house, which is rather different. I pointed the honourable

1:42:18 > 1:42:24member and her colleagues to my honourable friend from Inverness,

1:42:24 > 1:42:27Nairn, Strathearn and bedrock who has been working tirelessly on this,

1:42:27 > 1:42:32not only while a member of this house but also while he was a leader

1:42:32 > 1:42:35of Highland Council when Universal Credit was first tested in Highlands

1:42:35 > 1:42:41and he has been knocking against a brick wall in terms of the DWP to

1:42:41 > 1:42:43listen to the concerns he has phoned in his area that have not been

1:42:43 > 1:42:48listened to and are not shared with experiences the honourable member

1:42:48 > 1:42:56says she has in Redditch -- that he has found in his area.Apart from

1:42:56 > 1:42:59the honourable lady from Redditch saying how wonderful job centres are

1:42:59 > 1:43:03and the work they do, but I don't know if she has had the same

1:43:03 > 1:43:06experience as me in my city of Glasgow were six job centres have

1:43:06 > 1:43:11been and the others have been butchered. So how can we find out

1:43:11 > 1:43:14what is going on the job centres when her Government is busy closing

1:43:14 > 1:43:24them.I agree with my friend and I hope even at this late stage, even

1:43:24 > 1:43:28after the doors have closed that the Government may listen and finally

1:43:28 > 1:43:31provide a reprieve. It is right we also acknowledge the knock-on effect

1:43:31 > 1:43:35being felt by landlords who in turn are having their incomes squeezed

1:43:35 > 1:43:41due to tenants falling into arrears. This is due to success of cuts to

1:43:41 > 1:43:44Universal Credit. The SNP has continually called for the roll-out

1:43:44 > 1:43:48of Universal Credit to be paused and properly fixed, and that is not just

1:43:48 > 1:43:52about reducing the wait time I week for those receiving the Universal

1:43:52 > 1:43:56Credit. It is about restoring the original principles of Universal

1:43:56 > 1:44:02Credit. Cut back so far to its roots, they have been battered. The

1:44:02 > 1:44:06UK Government's wilful ignorance over this shameful. Evidence of the

1:44:06 > 1:44:09social destruction caused in its current form is clear from report

1:44:09 > 1:44:15after report from expert charities, social destruction which is not

1:44:15 > 1:44:18masked by the repeated ad nauseam wine from the Government that

1:44:18 > 1:44:21Universal Credit is getting people into work. That is not much good for

1:44:21 > 1:44:29people -- ad nauseam mine. Not much good if it is a shift from out of

1:44:29 > 1:44:37work poverty into in work property. We also know 67% of children, 67% of

1:44:37 > 1:44:39children, currently living in poverty do so in a family where at

1:44:39 > 1:44:44least one person works.

1:44:44 > 1:44:49Would he agree that most housing providers have deep concerns about

1:44:49 > 1:44:52Universal Credit in general and the direct payments to tenants who do

1:44:52 > 1:44:59have problems with paying, having that relationship?We will have to

1:44:59 > 1:45:03start with a five-minute limit, I don't want to start with four but we

1:45:03 > 1:45:07are in danger of going that way.I agree, which is why we are looking

1:45:07 > 1:45:10to bring about some of these flexibilities where we can in

1:45:10 > 1:45:13Scotland, where we have powers to do so.

1:45:13 > 1:45:17The Government must open their eyes to the crisis they have created for

1:45:17 > 1:45:23workers, people who are sick, who are disabled, landlords and tenants,

1:45:23 > 1:45:28employers, and urgently Holt and fix Universal Credit before any more of

1:45:28 > 1:45:34our constituents have to suffer. In Scotland, it is using some of the

1:45:34 > 1:45:40minimal new powers to give Scotland more choice over the Universal

1:45:40 > 1:45:48Credit payments. Of course, we would want to do more. If the whole of

1:45:48 > 1:45:52Universal Credit had been devolved to allow us to do so...Does my

1:45:52 > 1:45:55honourable friend agree with me that the Minister's suggestion women can

1:45:55 > 1:45:59apply for the exceptional alternative payment scheme isn't

1:45:59 > 1:46:06enough? The evidence shows that this needs to be the norm?I fully agree

1:46:06 > 1:46:10with my honourable friend. Again, I hope the Government is looking at

1:46:10 > 1:46:13her private members bill, which is due to be read again on Friday. I

1:46:13 > 1:46:17hope the Government will look at that again and do what is right and

1:46:17 > 1:46:23is needed for all areas of these isles to bring about these changes

1:46:23 > 1:46:29required. Turning now to EDM 1004, the changes

1:46:29 > 1:46:33to national insurance contributions, which comes into force on the 6th of

1:46:33 > 1:46:36April. Much of the comment on this area is not just about the

1:46:36 > 1:46:40regulations themselves but about the quality underpinning one of these

1:46:40 > 1:46:43changes, the UK Government was my decision to introduce a new scheme

1:46:43 > 1:46:54to support parents' childcare costs. To insert a clause. Parents will be

1:46:54 > 1:46:58able to simultaneously received support from the current scheme and

1:46:58 > 1:47:00the new tax-free childcare scheme for parents who wish to remain in

1:47:00 > 1:47:08the old voucher scheme can do so. There is no obligation to switch to

1:47:08 > 1:47:13the new scheme, however, existing voucher schemes will be closed to

1:47:13 > 1:47:18new applicants from next month. The delivery of affordable childcare is

1:47:18 > 1:47:22crucial for the development of children, as well as providing for

1:47:22 > 1:47:25families. Fundamental to this is parents on low incomes need to be

1:47:25 > 1:47:30protected from the impact of high childcare costs. That is one of the

1:47:30 > 1:47:35major barriers to us resolving the gender pay gap and the unemployment

1:47:35 > 1:47:40gap. Childcare continues to be expensive and inflexible. We are

1:47:40 > 1:47:44deeply concerned about the UK Government's plans to close the old

1:47:44 > 1:47:51voucher scheme to new applicants from April. The SNP wishes to

1:47:51 > 1:47:53support policies which helps parents and these they have the flexibility

1:47:53 > 1:47:58they need to give their children the best start in life. The UK

1:47:58 > 1:48:01Government must support working parents and keep this game going,

1:48:01 > 1:48:04alongside the tax-free childcare scheme, so parents can choose what

1:48:04 > 1:48:09is most suitable for their needs and offers the most support for their

1:48:09 > 1:48:13family. We must look at more detail at the impact the introduction of

1:48:13 > 1:48:17tax-free childcare will have across all different family types. One of

1:48:17 > 1:48:20the key problems here if this is an extremely complex area. The

1:48:20 > 1:48:25interaction of the two schemes with the benefit system is in additional

1:48:25 > 1:48:30layer of complicated bureaucracy for parents. For example, low income tax

1:48:30 > 1:48:33reform group highlighted this year that Universal Credit and tax credit

1:48:33 > 1:48:37claimants must seek advice before applying for tax-free childcare.

1:48:37 > 1:48:42They commented, if existed tax credit claimant makes a claim, if

1:48:42 > 1:48:48they do not claim any help with childcare costs, they claim will be

1:48:48 > 1:48:52terminated. If they live in an area where Universal Credit has rolled

1:48:52 > 1:48:56out, they may find they are not able to claim tax credits again and this

1:48:56 > 1:48:59is very confusing. This is a very significant issue with the new

1:48:59 > 1:49:05scheme. How is the Government making people aware of this? We note the

1:49:05 > 1:49:11DWP are bad with these campaigns, as we have previously seen before. We

1:49:11 > 1:49:15also know that the UK Government's benefit changes are creating

1:49:15 > 1:49:20confusion for people. Figures from the digital service shows claimants

1:49:20 > 1:49:25seem to be encountering significant problems with the Government's

1:49:25 > 1:49:28system of Universal Credit, with 48 out of 91 needing help that the Job

1:49:28 > 1:49:32Centre to set up an account. In Scotland, the SNP government has

1:49:32 > 1:49:39committed to almost doubling the early funding, funding for early

1:49:39 > 1:49:47childcare in a bid to transform life chances for children in Scotland. It

1:49:47 > 1:49:51is unmatched in the rest of the UK. In Scotland, 34-year-old and

1:49:51 > 1:49:59eligible to-year-olds benefit. The full rest entitlement is set to cost

1:49:59 > 1:50:03families £350 per child per month. Before I conclude, I would like to

1:50:03 > 1:50:08touch briefly on the other two motions on the free school lunches,

1:50:08 > 1:50:16every child in Scotland at the local council can get free school lunches,

1:50:16 > 1:50:20regardless of financial circumstances. Some children can

1:50:20 > 1:50:25also get free meals. This is an additional year that is provided in

1:50:25 > 1:50:33England. It requires arbitrary threshold is. We continue to call on

1:50:33 > 1:50:38the UK Government to devolved powers and funding so we can take control

1:50:38 > 1:50:42of Universal Credit in its entirety in Scotland and deliver in the best

1:50:42 > 1:50:44way possible for the people of Scotland.

1:50:44 > 1:50:59Finally, on the free childcare, we will fully expanded -- expanding

1:50:59 > 1:51:04hours from 75 hours to 600 hours. In conclusion, in all these areas, what

1:51:04 > 1:51:07is clear is when issues are devolved, we see better policy and

1:51:07 > 1:51:12better outcomes for the people of Scotland.A five-minute limit, Mr

1:51:12 > 1:51:16Marcus Jones. Mr Deputy Speaker, I welcome the

1:51:16 > 1:51:22Universal Credit regulations that are before the House today. I don't

1:51:22 > 1:51:26think we should forget that Universal Credit is an important

1:51:26 > 1:51:32reform. It's getting more people back into work. It's helping people

1:51:32 > 1:51:37stay in work, and people are getting the support and help from DWP staff

1:51:37 > 1:51:43that they were not getting in the past. I think a mark of this policy

1:51:43 > 1:51:49is shown by the enthusiasm of the staff that Job Centres when you go

1:51:49 > 1:51:54and visit them. I had the privilege of visiting, I visited them since

1:51:54 > 1:51:59but had the privilege in 2014th of visiting my Job Centre and taking my

1:51:59 > 1:52:05right honourable friend the Chingford and Woodford Green. We

1:52:05 > 1:52:09went into my Job Centre and they have a large training room there and

1:52:09 > 1:52:14they were doing a regional training conference for up and coming

1:52:14 > 1:52:21leaders, and I walked into this room full of civil servants with my right

1:52:21 > 1:52:24honourable friend, and immediately the whole room applauded my right

1:52:24 > 1:52:30honourable friend, which shows me they are a group of people that

1:52:30 > 1:52:34don't owe any government anything in terms of their support or loyalty,

1:52:34 > 1:52:38but it shows me that those people think that the reforms that my right

1:52:38 > 1:52:41honourable friend was making, the Government is now making, are worth

1:52:41 > 1:52:45doing. And actually, visiting those people and speaking to them since

1:52:45 > 1:52:51clearly indicates to me that the people that are working on Job

1:52:51 > 1:52:56Centres now think they are making a real and positive difference. Now, I

1:52:56 > 1:52:59won't say the roll of Universal Credit hasn't been without its

1:52:59 > 1:53:03challenges. We all know it has. That is why the Government has put

1:53:03 > 1:53:08forward this package today, a package worth £1.5 billion to

1:53:08 > 1:53:13people. But I think we should also acknowledge that by voting down that

1:53:13 > 1:53:20package today people would potentially put those people that

1:53:20 > 1:53:23need the help at that time in a situation where they can't get their

1:53:23 > 1:53:29advance within five days, where they can have the extra six months to pay

1:53:29 > 1:53:32any advance, where they would be in a position where they would have to

1:53:32 > 1:53:35go back to seven days of waiting time before their claim could be

1:53:35 > 1:53:42processed. And the issues that my right honourable friend mentioned,

1:53:42 > 1:53:46particularly around housing benefit, where people would be in a worse

1:53:46 > 1:53:49position in that regard. So I think the House needs to think very

1:53:49 > 1:53:55carefully before voting down these regulations that are actually

1:53:55 > 1:53:58positive, and things that actually members on the opposite side of the

1:53:58 > 1:54:01chamber wanted just a few months ago.

1:54:01 > 1:54:05Just quickly, Mr Speaker, I will mention school meals, free school

1:54:05 > 1:54:09meals. I think it is important to point out that what we are

1:54:09 > 1:54:12discussing today doesn't change the entitlement to year one and two

1:54:12 > 1:54:16children, all of which get free school meals. I think we also need

1:54:16 > 1:54:19to be careful with this figure of 1 million children are going to lose

1:54:19 > 1:54:25out, because as soon as I heard that, at the same afternoon at a

1:54:25 > 1:54:29vote in the House I went and accosted the education minister to

1:54:29 > 1:54:33ask him if this was true. And quite clearly he pointed out that it

1:54:33 > 1:54:38wasn't true. I think that we do need to look at the fact. And when we

1:54:38 > 1:54:44compare... I will give way.I am grateful to my friend for giving

1:54:44 > 1:54:47way. My honourable friend will recognise the proposal from the

1:54:47 > 1:54:52opposition in terms of school meals was to pay for school meals in their

1:54:52 > 1:54:56manifesto by charging VAT on private schools, something which is illegal

1:54:56 > 1:54:59under EU law. So does my right honourable friend find it confusing

1:54:59 > 1:55:04that they would put to stay in the single market in the customs union

1:55:04 > 1:55:07and still be at odds with their policy?

1:55:07 > 1:55:12I think what my honourable friend is telling the House today and

1:55:12 > 1:55:16demonstrating is the complete confusion and disarray that the

1:55:16 > 1:55:20opposition are in, not just around this policy, but also things like

1:55:20 > 1:55:26the policy around our future out of the European Union. I think it does

1:55:26 > 1:55:31go to the heart of this situation that this is all about political

1:55:31 > 1:55:37dogma, rather than practical ideas and practical help for people.

1:55:37 > 1:55:42I will give away. I've thank the honourable member for

1:55:42 > 1:55:50giving way. With the honourable member agree or disagree that the

1:55:50 > 1:55:57Children's Society figures of 16,500 children denied free school meals in

1:55:57 > 1:56:01the county of Cheshire which I represent and the Secretary of State

1:56:01 > 1:56:09represents, is that political dogma? What I would say to the honourable

1:56:09 > 1:56:13gentleman is that actually, the new system is quite clearly more

1:56:13 > 1:56:19generous than the old system. I will come and to external evidence which

1:56:19 > 1:56:25explains that in a moment. But just to bring it back to the

1:56:25 > 1:56:29heart of what I was saying about free school meals, the fact of the

1:56:29 > 1:56:34matter is that under the old system of JS eight, as soon as somebody did

1:56:34 > 1:56:4016 hours or if there was two 24 hours, they lost their entitlement

1:56:40 > 1:56:44for their children to have free school meals. I think that is the

1:56:44 > 1:56:48crux of this debate. We have to compare and contrast that with what

1:56:48 > 1:56:56we're moving to, which is a situation where all of the people

1:56:56 > 1:57:01that go into the system, that have been in the system at this point,

1:57:01 > 1:57:05they have all been eligible, and that is because of the transitional

1:57:05 > 1:57:08arrangements and it has been made quite clear by members on this side

1:57:08 > 1:57:11of the House while those transitional arrangements were put

1:57:11 > 1:57:19in place. But it is clear that the new system, when we have a situation

1:57:19 > 1:57:22when everybody's on Universal Credit and we are following the regulations

1:57:22 > 1:57:28put forward today that are put into place, by 2022, an additional 50,000

1:57:28 > 1:57:33children will be eligible for free school meals that have hitherto not

1:57:33 > 1:57:37been eligible. Now, I hear all the noise from the

1:57:37 > 1:57:43benches opposite, but they shouldn't just take my word for it. They

1:57:43 > 1:57:48shouldn't take the word for it of members on this side, they should go

1:57:48 > 1:57:54on to the Channel 4 website and look at the Channel 4 fact check website.

1:57:54 > 1:57:59And having looked at that, and I will just, and I would just quote

1:57:59 > 1:58:04what the Channel 4 fact check website says. It says that this is

1:58:04 > 1:58:08not a case of the Government taking free school meals from a million

1:58:08 > 1:58:15children who are currently receiving them, it's about future hypothetical

1:58:15 > 1:58:17scenarios. Both of them are more generous than the old

1:58:26 > 1:58:29The party opposite frequently looked for us to improve the situation in

1:58:29 > 1:58:32the lives of the most vulnerable which is what we are doing and what

1:58:32 > 1:58:36these regulations are doing today. Unfortunately the party opposite

1:58:36 > 1:58:40seem not to let the facts and the truth get in the way of a good

1:58:40 > 1:58:44story. It is too much political dogma, and they are putting that

1:58:44 > 1:58:48before people. This side of the House are putting people first. This

1:58:48 > 1:58:51system will be better than the system was hitherto, and that is why

1:58:51 > 1:58:58I will be supporting the Government. The measures we are debating today

1:58:58 > 1:59:03expose what's been happening to our country since 2010. In the name of

1:59:03 > 1:59:06deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility the Tories have

1:59:06 > 1:59:15allowed the most vulnerable and poorest to become more vulnerable

1:59:15 > 1:59:19and poorer. They were perceived by too many people as the nasty party

1:59:19 > 1:59:24and the Prime Minister is presiding over a Government with a cavalier

1:59:24 > 1:59:28disregard for social justice. It is true in the aftermath of the global

1:59:28 > 1:59:31financial crisis any UK Government would have had to make tough

1:59:31 > 1:59:34choices, and striking the right balance between spending cuts, tax

1:59:34 > 1:59:38increases and investment in growth. However, the reality is too often

1:59:38 > 1:59:44they have made the wrong choices, choices motivated by an independent

1:59:44 > 1:59:49ideological project to whether the state irrespective of its effect on

1:59:49 > 1:59:54the poorest in our society, communities, and on growth.Can he

1:59:54 > 2:00:01just remind us all a note was there from a member of his Government that

2:00:01 > 2:00:10said quite properly there was no money left? This Government has

2:00:10 > 2:00:13absolutely protected those very people that matter to all of us, and

2:00:13 > 2:00:18this is tribal nonsense.I have a lot of respect for the honourable

2:00:18 > 2:00:22lady, but to claim that the financial crisis is anything other

2:00:22 > 2:00:26than as a consequence of a crash which started on Wall Street is the

2:00:26 > 2:00:34biggest distortion of history in this country... I will give way once

2:00:34 > 2:00:39more.Well, the honourable gentleman is rewriting history. The fact that

2:00:39 > 2:00:42is if the Labour Government had fixed the roof when the sun was

2:00:42 > 2:00:45shining, when that crisis came along it could have weathered the storm.

2:00:45 > 2:00:49And that is what this responsible government has been doing since

2:00:49 > 2:00:582010.The honourable lady's party didn't, Mr Deputy Speaker, they

2:00:58 > 2:01:03wanted us to regulate the banks and the financial services sector less

2:01:03 > 2:01:07than the regulatory system we had in place. They committed to matching

2:01:07 > 2:01:11our spending and borrowing and they didn't want us to rescue the banks.

2:01:11 > 2:01:14Imagine if that prescription had been followed at the time we were

2:01:14 > 2:01:20dealing with that financial crisis. The Government's choices are

2:01:20 > 2:01:24motivated by an ideological project to whether the state, irrespective

2:01:24 > 2:01:27of its impact. There are disproportionate cuts have choked

2:01:27 > 2:01:32off growth and destroyed too much of our social fabric. The tax changes

2:01:32 > 2:01:35have failed dismally to tackle tax avoidance or in tough times ensures

2:01:35 > 2:01:40those with the most carry the greatest burden. Their failure to

2:01:40 > 2:01:45invest in infrastructure, skills and jobs has led to economic growth

2:01:45 > 2:01:49which is anaemic compared to similar economies. The Government's on

2:01:49 > 2:01:52assessments predict this economic failure will be made even worse by

2:01:52 > 2:01:57the uncertainty and instability that is the inevitable consequence of

2:01:57 > 2:02:02Brexit -- the Government's assessments. Maybe she will agree on

2:02:02 > 2:02:06this point. History will recall this had nothing to dowith the National

2:02:06 > 2:02:11will. It was David Cameron's fix for managing the Tory party through a

2:02:11 > 2:02:17general election. I am not giving way again. Far from being the party

2:02:17 > 2:02:21of economic competence, they are the party of economic chaos. To be

2:02:21 > 2:02:27clear, the policies we are opposing today are neither necessary nor

2:02:27 > 2:02:30acceptable in a civilised society. They are political choices made by

2:02:30 > 2:02:36this Tory Government. Members of the party opposite have spoken during

2:02:36 > 2:02:40the course of this debate, they are in denial. Too many of our fellow

2:02:40 > 2:02:43citizens may as well be living in a different country than the one that

2:02:43 > 2:02:48they describe. There reality, Mr Deputy Speaker, is food banks,

2:02:48 > 2:02:53perpetual debt and poor quality of life, and a lack of hope for

2:02:53 > 2:02:56themselves and their children. Some of course are dependent on benefits,

2:02:56 > 2:03:01but increasing numbers of people in work, on permanent low pay and

2:03:01 > 2:03:14insecure law contracts. This should offend any member of this House who

2:03:20 > 2:03:23believes in social justice, but also cares about the future of mainstream

2:03:23 > 2:03:25politics. Increasingly, we see here and abroad people who feel left

2:03:25 > 2:03:27behind by mainstream politics turned the antiestablishment nationalism

2:03:27 > 2:03:29which spreads hate and division. That is another reason these

2:03:29 > 2:03:31policies are so irresponsible. I will give way.A few month ago he

2:03:31 > 2:03:34had a go at Brexit and his own constituency voted to leave the

2:03:34 > 2:03:40European Union. How did he think that will help with stopping people

2:03:40 > 2:03:43tending to extremes and is in franchising them?He misses the

2:03:43 > 2:03:47point. Of course I believe the result of the referendum must be

2:03:47 > 2:03:50respected. I questioned the motive for the referendum in the first

2:03:50 > 2:03:53place. It is David Cameron's folly and that is how it will be

2:03:53 > 2:03:58remembered in history, and it was done for the interests of the

2:03:58 > 2:04:01Conservative Party, not the interests of our country.

2:04:01 > 2:04:08I will give way one last time.I have respect, some, too, but it is

2:04:08 > 2:04:11beginning to wane, but I will not followed with the honourable

2:04:11 > 2:04:15gentleman. But I will make this point. It is not good enough just to

2:04:15 > 2:04:19blame it all on David Cameron because he, like me, what through

2:04:19 > 2:04:24the lobbies, as did the majority of people in this House, to support a

2:04:24 > 2:04:28referendum. We are now dealing with the consequences, but we are all

2:04:28 > 2:04:32complicit in agreeing that the British people would vote and

2:04:32 > 2:04:40determine whether we stayed or be left. -- or whether we left. Young

2:04:40 > 2:04:43and simply saying to the honourable lady and history will bear this out,

2:04:43 > 2:04:47that it was purely to keep the Conservative Party together, to get

2:04:47 > 2:04:49through a general election, nothing to do with thenational interest,

2:04:49 > 2:04:58and that arrogance of him and the then Chancellor that they would

2:04:58 > 2:05:02inevitably win. In terms of Universal Credit and free school

2:05:02 > 2:05:05meals, the issue of today, the Government could hardly have made

2:05:05 > 2:05:09more of a mess of Universal Credit. Mr Deputy Speaker, the National

2:05:09 > 2:05:16Audit Office stated that this has suffered from weak management, and

2:05:16 > 2:05:19poor Government. Is that the responsibility of the current

2:05:19 > 2:05:22Secretary of State or the previous one? Perhaps the Secretary of State

2:05:22 > 2:05:28would like to respond. It says "Weak management, ineffective control and

2:05:28 > 2:05:35poor governance." Secretary of State? OK, cuts the Universal Credit

2:05:35 > 2:05:39legislated in the last ten years have left a majority of families

2:05:39 > 2:05:42worse off under Universal Credit than the system it place and that

2:05:42 > 2:05:46further reduction will add to their financial pain. It has the potential

2:05:46 > 2:05:50for a negative effect on work incentives and risks creating

2:05:50 > 2:05:54poverty traps for families on Universal Credit. Going completely

2:05:54 > 2:05:57against the Government's goal that Universal Credit should always

2:05:57 > 2:06:02reward work. Mr Deputy Speaker, in the 1980s Tory policies created a

2:06:02 > 2:06:07deeply divided society. They have learned nothing from history, and

2:06:07 > 2:06:11are once again fuelling the cycle of intergenerational deprivation,

2:06:11 > 2:06:17deprivation which hurts those most affected, but in the end, Mr Deputy

2:06:17 > 2:06:21Speaker, damages us all. I hope the House today will force the

2:06:21 > 2:06:26Government to rethink these regressive measures.By talking

2:06:26 > 2:06:31about the matters before us, I don't do this lightly and I don't approach

2:06:31 > 2:06:35the matters in these instruments lightly. I will tell you why I

2:06:35 > 2:06:39don't. I was brought up by a single parent who was widowed a month

2:06:39 > 2:06:43before I was born, who worked shifts in a factory and who got by buy a

2:06:43 > 2:06:48result of her widow's pension, child's benefit and the money she

2:06:48 > 2:06:51made, and by managing that money carefully, so I know the impact only

2:06:51 > 2:06:57too well that changes to this can have. But I also know that people in

2:06:57 > 2:07:01those situations are acutely concerned about the changes coming

2:07:01 > 2:07:08down the line and about alarmist things being said currently. And so

2:07:08 > 2:07:13I appeal to the Opposition front bench in particular. Think of those

2:07:13 > 2:07:17people when you are making alarmist statements and alarmist comments. By

2:07:17 > 2:07:24all means have legitimate and fair and open debate, do that, but don't

2:07:24 > 2:07:29trot out numbers that are simply not true. Don't let people believe that

2:07:29 > 2:07:33something is going to be taken from them, something as precious as free

2:07:33 > 2:07:39school meals, when that is not the case. And I say to our front bench,

2:07:39 > 2:07:41where these changes anything closely resembling what the Labour front

2:07:41 > 2:07:47bench was proposing these are not changes I can support, but they are

2:07:47 > 2:07:51nothing like what the Labour front bench is proposing. Mr Deputy

2:07:51 > 2:07:56Speaker, if I can put on record my thanks to the Secretary of State for

2:07:56 > 2:07:59Education for correspondence I received outlining the Government

2:07:59 > 2:08:02position on free school meals. If I may actually refer to some of

2:08:02 > 2:08:07that... The proposed changes in the eligibility criteria have been

2:08:07 > 2:08:11designed to ensure support is targeted weight is needed most. This

2:08:11 > 2:08:18means those of the lowest incomes remain the focus of free meals. "No

2:08:18 > 2:08:21Child will lose their meals during the roll-out of Universal Credit as

2:08:21 > 2:08:28a result of these changes. Our plans mean an extra 50,000 children will

2:08:28 > 2:08:36be eligible for a nutritious meal at school by 2022. Labour's claims that

2:08:36 > 2:08:40are changes would leave over a million children without this is

2:08:40 > 2:08:43deliberately misleading." I once again refer to the people out there

2:08:43 > 2:08:47in the real world to think something is going to be taken from them and

2:08:47 > 2:08:52their child, and that causes concern and alarm. And I do question whether

2:08:52 > 2:09:00there is a deliberate attempt to weaponised the vulnerable in a way

2:09:00 > 2:09:08that people feel about the NHS being weaponised, in order to break votes.

2:09:08 > 2:09:11I honestly urge people, don't do that, because you will cause fear

2:09:11 > 2:09:15and anxiety where it is not required, because there is enough

2:09:15 > 2:09:21fear and anxiety in those households as it is. Mr Deputy Speaker, since

2:09:21 > 2:09:242010 we have extended the availability for free school meals

2:09:24 > 2:09:29to disadvantaged students in further education, and introduced universal

2:09:29 > 2:09:35infant free school meals. When Universal Credit was introduced, the

2:09:35 > 2:09:39Government were clear that they would set a new criteria for free

2:09:39 > 2:09:42school meals to ensure no one was adversely affected during its

2:09:42 > 2:09:48roll-out. The Government temporarily made Universal Credit qualifying

2:09:48 > 2:09:51benefit for free school meals, regardless of income, as it was made

2:09:51 > 2:09:58clear at the time this was always a temporary measure. If you receive a